This has been one of the most rough and tumble elections perhaps any of us have ever seen. Not to say that there haven’t been other wild rides in U.S. history, there have been. But one likes to think that we learn from our past mistakes and evolve. This election seems to defy that thinking.
If anti-trust laws were to be applied to political parties and media which both monopolize and define virtually all political discourse, we would likely have a very different country, one in which Democracy and its values of equality, freedom and 1-tiered justice would be the norm, near opposite of what we have today. I suggest we apply these laws designed to break up monopolies to both by petitioning Congress immediately.
Ironically in a free society where one’s vote is held to be sacred, we are virtually coerced to treat it as a bargaining chip in a casino, not as a dignified expression of our freedom to choose and vote in what is held to be the greatest Democracy in the world.
In the best of all possible worlds, we shouldn’t have to strategize and “play political football” or relate to the election the way the media does, virtually indistinguishable from a horse race, noting only who stumbled and who now is pulling ahead or falling behind. This is not journalism but calling the race moment-to-moment. It’s good to remember that these days that TV journalism is often part of the entertainment division of the respective stations.
No wonder the American people have “election fatigue” and are truly disgusted with “politics as usual”. That includes, by the way, the severe limits of a two-party system. It would be good for the two parties and the media to digest the fact that 43% of American voters are registered as Independent.
The point is made. Yet independent parties are excluded from the debates which are controlled by “Dempublicans.’ Here is my A Better World Radio interview with George Farah, author of No Debate, which is how the two parties took the national debates out of the hands of the League of Women Voters into their own.
So it’s apparently just fine with both parties and the media to, in effect, exclude nearly 1 of every 2 voters from proper representation on TV, radio, print and the debates.
Perhaps we have a lesson to learn from the Brits who hold their elections within about 6 weeks without money or campaigning as we do. All the candidates are given equal airtime on the public airwaves, they make their case and the people then vote. Is that Paradisal? You betcha! Is there a reason we cannot do that? Because our elections and government are about money and power, not about being in service to the American People, everything, truly everything, is upside down and skewed.
Our vote should reflect our heart, our deeply-held values as we see a candidate with whom we feel aligned, expressing them and a vision of the future we share in common. We should not be caged in by an exceedingly limited, highly-narrowed set of choices that don’t reflect who we are.
Yes, you could say that I am living in a paradisal world, not the “real”, dog-eat-dog one. You are partially right. I don’t really like eating dogs, do you? But I’d rather gage how far we have come from a world based on honesty and integrity and see which world we’d like to live in. Isn’t it important for us to see how, as a people, we have so regressed, that being a dreamer of a good life, a visionary, is now considered “unrealistic”? How about if we commit to making it real? Or as my teacher, Richard Bandler of Neuro-linguistic Programming fame titled one of his books, “Using Your Brain for a Change”.
If Gandhi didn’t dream and hold vision, India may still be under British rule today. If George Washington didn’t do same, the colonies may also still be under British rule today. When in the presence of visionaries, people tend to ridicule them and call them “naïve and unrealistic”. Yet it is exactly they who have historically—and today--pave the way for a better future for the People.
“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.” Margaret Mead
In the current election cycle, there is no one I have seen that exemplifies the holding of a positive vision for our country and world better than Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. The major candidates want business-as-usual their way, full of fracking, huge walls and no-fly zones. Is that the America you want? We need to stop making believe that these two candidates are actually so radically different from each other, curious as that may sound. But radically different from Dr. Jill Stein, Harvard-trained physician? You betcha!
Here’s how: Stein stands for creating a Dept. of Peace in the tradition of Rep. Dennis Kucinich. She stands vigorously behind building a green economy so to responsibly address Climate Change and the economy. She is vehemently against fracking and any unnecessary fossil fuel development. She is for the eradication of the privatization of prisons and justice for all with focus on minorities.
Stein is the only candidate who stood up at Standing Rock with tribal leaders and the Native People. As a physician, she advocates for natural, alternative, holistic forms of medicine alongside the prudent use of allopathic medicine. She knows to follow the money trail in the fields of medicine, Big Pharma, military, insurance, politics, big agriculture, the justice system and on. She wants a solarized economy!
Many of us can stand behind Jill Stein and the Green Party without any hesitation or second-guessing at all. Isn’t this the way we should feel when we back a candidate and vote?
People say that “a vote for a third party is a vote for Trump”. Oh? Could this be voting from fear, the reptilian brain, something people have become quite accustomed to and go for the “lesser of two evils”. The only problem is that you still end up with “evil”. Or can we activate our pre-frontal cortex and heart? If so, I think we’d have very different results and a much more mature country.
The point is that whoever wins, neither deserves a landslide. 3rd Party voting neutralizes this confusion. If either party were to believe they’ve received a mandate from the voting public to build their policies, in either case, we are in trouble! The two parties and the media need to see the true dissatisfaction of the American People with the two-party system which has so obviously failed us in every single election because there is simply not enough choice. In other words, one can consider using their vote as a symbol and sending a message.
If, for instance, Stein were to receive 5-10% of the vote, this would send a strong message and set a very important stage for mid-term voting and 2020. We’ll be in so much hot water if there is any by then, from fracking which both candidates want and other business-as-usual practices that ignore the reality of Climate Change, we may only have heat in 2020, not water, and a lot of it. Then people may regret their “practical and strategic” vote in 2016 and wish they had voted for the only candidate in 2016 who has dealing with Climate Change as an authentic, top priority of her agenda.
I am suggesting that the way to stem the toxic tide we have been corralled into is to vote your heart. If that leads you to The Green Party and Dr. Jill Stein, go for it, as a means of building a future, longer-term position for the Green Party in the duopolized nation in which most everyone recognizes has major fault lines in it and severely limits Democratic choice in what is supposed to be “the greatest Democracy in the world.”
It is time to think, as the Native Americans say, “like an eagle now, not like the mouse.” Take the longer view, see the bigger picture. Stein isn’t going to be winning the Oval Office in 2016, true, but time passes rather quickly, and before we know it, the disillusionment over the next 4 years would have multiplied and the Green Party may start to look, very, very good to a lot more Americans.
�/��6���r�