Saturday, September 6, 2008

The Obamaniac

"True change doesn't come through the ballot box -- even though we're all taught that it does. For voting was instituted to insure stability, not change. I know this may seem somewhat sacrilegious to many entranced during this current political season, for it certainly looks like change. But if we look deeper, we see how the very process itself -- the campaign -- is an exercise in conformity. People come to political campaigns to reassure themselves that their politicians won't bring too much change. In essence, our political campaigns are little more than slick popularity contests: who looks best? Who makes me feel most comfortable?” –Mumia Abu Jamal


So I asked Maisy, “what do you think about Mckinney running for president?”. She vocally corroborated what her blank stare had been telling me for the past few seconds with a response of “who?”. Once I explained Mckinney’s history as an African woman formerly of the “democratic” party and how she was now running under the banner of the Green party, her response was “ why she hating? she gonna mess it up for Obama”. Right there, lurking in my midst was another poor victim of Obamamania. I of course, tried to free my dear friend from the grips of this spell that has inexplicably swept the nation. Under intense pressure, you could almost see her curl up into a mental fetal position as she retreated to a defensive posture and began to run the A.B.M.(anybody but McCain) line, a close cousin to the A.B.B. line, but not nearly as popular.

Man, this “change we can believe in” crap is so smooth, even Castro been sipping the kool-aid. He called Obama the most progressive of all the presidential candidates. That’s when you know Obamamania has reached epidemic proportions. People you thought would be immune to this sort of hustle are falling victim left and right. The truth is, the difference between “democrat” and “republican” is like the difference between coke and pepsi. Am I lying? Take a look at who hasn’t fallen victim Obamamania. If they really were that different, there’s no way Lieberman would have flipped and started helping the top guy for the other team. What about all these Clinton fanatics who refuse to fall in line behind Obama? On the issues, Obama and Clinton are like twins. The fact that so many of these Clintonistas would go for the other team or even consider it, shows that there isn’t a big difference between any of them. For most voters, it really just comes down to a matter of who is cooler, or cuter or funnier or not as intelligent(George Bush) or whatever they use to distinguish the candidates in their own minds (I personally gave up on that pointless exercise a very long time ago). It certainly aint any type of meaningful change that distinguishes them.

As long as people continue to slop up this garbage about there being 2 parties(they really are on the same team) and you really have some big choice to make, we won’t get any meaningful change. That’s why I for one was happy to hear Mckinney was running for the green Party. It shows people are starting to wake up. The greatest weapon the enemy has is being able to control our thinking. In fact, the only way this so called democracy works is if the majority of us remain sleeping. That’s the only way we would continue to allow ourselves to be pimped by the american capitalist machine.

Ready for the Revolution!!!

1 comment:

HumanDynamo said...

I am not sure where to start with this as I agree with you on several points; we have spoken at length about this so I won't go into everything right now.

I guess your first piece of logic I question is the matter of who drinks the kool-aid. The fact is that good ol' Joe Leiberman is all over John because the Obama, and the democratic party, is different. The Clintonians tend to be centrists and Obama ran as a progressive, or made it seem so, during the primaries. That is not two say that both parties are not corporatist at this point but there are some real differences.

You are completely correct about our political process being about popularity. If you want "real" change then look to the green party or other progressive and socialist parties that are on the ballots.

The quote you began with is also correct. The political system in America does not lend itself to change or to diversity. The way it works is that whichever person gets the most votes wins; George Bush in 2000 and 2004 proves that this is also wrong.

With two prominent parties all one person has to do is get 51% of the vote. With three parties the winner only needs to get 34% of the vote. If you are as good as I am with math then you know the rest. In effect, a person who does not necessarily represent the population as a whole can get the reigns of office.

What really needs change is our political system. The green party is at the forefront of getting instant runoff voting or other methods of getting true representation. The real reigns of power is in active Congress and an active electorate. Vote for the Green party for local low level offices, but yes, A.B.M.