A 19th century anecdote held that if you put a frog in a pot of
boiling water, it will jump out, but if you put it in a pot of cold water and
gradually increase the temperature, the frog will die. The story is meant
to illustrate the theory that people will not resist change that is detrimental
to them if the change is gradual enough.
Modern science disputes the notion of boiling amphibians. If you put a frog in
boiling water it will surely die. If you put a frog anywhere else it will
certainly not sit still. As for human beings, however, we have to wonder. As
the Project For The New American Century stated in their report, Rebuilding
America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century, “The
process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to
be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl
Harbor.” This report was published in September 2000, approximately one year
before the attacks on the World Trade Center.
In 2001 we experienced changes of the boiling water variety and much of what
remained of our Republic died. Shocked, angry, fearful, we allowed
government to expand its powers of coercion to historic levels. Homeland
Security, domestic spying, Patriot Acts and a host of Orwellian measures thinly
disguised by Orwellian language have given government almost absolute control
over our destinies. The legislative branch of government has competed with the
executive to come up with new ways to tighten control while the Supreme Court,
by promoting the supremacy of corporate “personhood” did its part to ensure
that the process of governing remains very much an insider’s game.
Many of us did not sit still. We did what Americans do when we are
dissatisfied. We used what remains of our right to freedom of speech and we
complained. Many have chronicled the decline of the Republic. Thousands of
articles have been written and the Internet is still rich with a variety of
opinions of what to do about the problem. We voted, not a majority of us but
still a formidable number. We elected Republicans and when nothing changed for
the better we elected Democrats and now we may once again elect Republicans.
One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting
different results. I don’t know that we are insane as much as we are severely
limited by the false dilemma presented by the “two party” system. A growing
number of us are of the opinion that the platforms, the speeches, the policy
statements and the campaign promises are simply part of the effort to
manipulate our votes and that the choices with which we are presented are an
illusion of choice. The real agenda is one of corporate profit and personal
gain and as our dissatisfaction with the status quo increases, the measures
that the status quo will take to ensure its own survival will also escalate.
It’s not that all of our candidates campaign for office with nothing but
mercenary intentions, but how long can an ideals and good intentions survive in
an entrenched environment of influence peddling? If Goldman Sachs, for example,
contributes heavily to both the Obama and Romney campaigns (should Romney win
the nomination) how likely is it that Goldman Sachs will have no influence at
all in the executive branch of government? Substitute the corporation of your
choice and apply it to a hundred Senate and 435 Congressional seats.
Neither is it the case that corporations are all evil or that lobbyists are all
scoundrels. Corporations and individuals both attempt to maximize conditions to
their own advantage. The problem is that the deck is stacked against the
average citizen. The problem is that the choice offered to us by democrats and
republicans alone is an illusion. The two party system, in spite of the ideals
and the dedication that exists in both camps, functions more and more as the
medium through which influence is peddled and less as tool of democracy. The
two party system, rather than being an agent of change for the voting public,
is an agent for empowering the status quo to make the changes necessary to
ensure its survival. Bo Peabody writes in Village Ventures, “By cozying up to
big business and passing laws that effectively close the political process to
outsiders, the Democrats and Republicans dampen the influence of individual
voters while ensuring the collective power of their two-party system, no
ma1tter which one of the parties is ruling.”
We disagree on many topics, but most of us would agree that corruption in
government is a serious problem. Most of us are not entirely comfortable with
the increasing size and coercive power of all forms of government. What can we
do? Most of us cannot afford to leave our jobs and “occupy” someplace in
protest. We can certainly vote, but the vast majority of our choices claim to
be either democrats or republicans. Is there anything we can do at all?
Perhaps, as my grandfather used to say, “it’s time to quit preachin’ and go to
meddling.”
Consider what might happen if millions of voters simply opted out of the two
party system. Most of us, over 70%, are registered either as a democrat or a
republican. What if the majority of us were registered as independent?
How would the business of influence peddling function without the medium
to which it is now attached? Would the vast party organizations that now funnel
millions of dollars become more of what a democracy needs, generators of new
ideas to join a variety of viewpoints in a true discussion of real choices?
Personally, I would be willing to find
out. Georgia, unfortunately, does not offer an option for registering as
an “Independent” per se, but we do have an equivalent. You can begin by going
to the website, http://www.usa.gov/Citizen/Topics/Voting/Register.shtml
. Click on the “Register to Vote by Mail” link and you can download the
National Mail Voter Registration Form. Leave Box 7 where it says “Choice
of Party” blank for Georgia.
