03-23-2016, 01:34 AM
The two dominant political parties are quite similar in that neither are willing to bring up serious discussion on a host of issues concerning the nuts and bolts of how our "democracy" functions and issues which are entrenched through precedence. To name some of the issues that will never be touched on/altered no matter which party people vote for:
The US's staunch support for the militarily aggressive and human rights trampling state of Isreal, support for Saudi Arabia's radical Islamic royal family, the broken electoral college system that has allowed at least one president to win an election while losing in the popular vote, a legal system based entirely on precedent rather than logic/morals, a federal reserve that controls the national money supply that is not under federal or public control, real campaign finance reform, the US's overwhelming dominance in global "defense" spending, the US's status as the #1 weapons exporter in the world, substantial climate change policy, action working toward the notion that all institutions should be ran democratically rather than be allowed to function as mini-command economies or mini-dictatorships, decentralization of power away from positions such as the presidency/Supreme Court justices, reform of the judicial system, our out of control Intelligence Community that takes our money and breaks our laws with impunity, the omnipresent creep closer toward a police state in which police are allowed to violate civilian rights with impunity, and I could probably go on and on.
The political paradigm has been defined in this country-any and all who step outside of it or rock the boat too much are blacklisted or obfuscated. We may bicker about abortion, or prayer in school, or small percentages in taxes, but at the end of the day we will probably not be allowed to vote for anyone who is serious about changing anything regarding how this country operates or is serious about fixing firmly entrenched "precedence" mistakes. Even a "radical" or "wildcard" candidate such as Sanders or a Trump would probably not touch these issues with lip service nor policy change. How's that for an "echo chamber"?
The US's staunch support for the militarily aggressive and human rights trampling state of Isreal, support for Saudi Arabia's radical Islamic royal family, the broken electoral college system that has allowed at least one president to win an election while losing in the popular vote, a legal system based entirely on precedent rather than logic/morals, a federal reserve that controls the national money supply that is not under federal or public control, real campaign finance reform, the US's overwhelming dominance in global "defense" spending, the US's status as the #1 weapons exporter in the world, substantial climate change policy, action working toward the notion that all institutions should be ran democratically rather than be allowed to function as mini-command economies or mini-dictatorships, decentralization of power away from positions such as the presidency/Supreme Court justices, reform of the judicial system, our out of control Intelligence Community that takes our money and breaks our laws with impunity, the omnipresent creep closer toward a police state in which police are allowed to violate civilian rights with impunity, and I could probably go on and on.
The political paradigm has been defined in this country-any and all who step outside of it or rock the boat too much are blacklisted or obfuscated. We may bicker about abortion, or prayer in school, or small percentages in taxes, but at the end of the day we will probably not be allowed to vote for anyone who is serious about changing anything regarding how this country operates or is serious about fixing firmly entrenched "precedence" mistakes. Even a "radical" or "wildcard" candidate such as Sanders or a Trump would probably not touch these issues with lip service nor policy change. How's that for an "echo chamber"?
