Graduating from the Electoral College: Act I

Setting: Frontier Living in the Back of the Mind



Can the U.S. truly claim to spread Democracy, while never being a Democratically Structured Government itself? Put another way, why does our Republican Politics find resonance with the expression that Democracy is being spread by American rule? Aren’t they the only ones that feel this way?


Before we try and wring out the loftier essences of our political system, let’s investigate its ever trusty pragmatism. Pragmatically speaking, the use of a Democratic-Republic, over that of a Direct Democracy, is how simple it is to implement. In order to elect a Republican Representative, one only needs to be a ‘good judge of character’ (which Republicans will typically describe themselves as, regardless of how others may feel they have been utterly duped by their party). Alternatively, if we were to directly vote on policy, then the voter would have to be acutely aware of said policy’s: social impacts, restrictions on freedom, impression on foreign countries, economic consequences, current need for action, things of this nature…, and these voters (however many are designated) need to agree in broad terms that the policy only has a few possible implementations (or border on chaos when an amorphous 3% of the populace manages to elect policies on indeterminate ideological bases)(some direct democracies accomplish the structuring of directness by limiting those who can vote {like the French Revolution}, but the Freedom of the voter in their relationship to the rigid government, provided by a Democratic-Republic, is precisely what allowed for the voters expansion without a deeper fundamental instability {like what eventually happens in the U.S.}).


Access to the sort of knowledge that could create a cohesive united State of America had been localized (before increased Globalization allowed for smoother, free-range modes of habitation [Through televisual learning, and Medias’ Regnum]), disparate (before Northern Unification sealed its guiding principle [Namely Racism, and its end] / before Western Expansion caught up with its desires [Explicitly Sexism, and its destruction]), and varied (before the most basic problems {need of land and her resources, where states would occur and how they would be tied together, who were the enemies of the state and why} were adequately solved throughout the Colonial and Republican Eras [and then taken for granted as problematic, and not a problem]). So the most logical solution was to respect the locality enough to: sort disparate views, and take care of their varied problems (which created the mini-states within the over-state, each inhabitant of which extrapolates from the position that they’re within a reverse matryoshka doll of what America is {Where you built the County on You, the State on the County, the Country on the State, and eventually might reach out the world}).


Scene A: Crossing State Lines




A common tactic Republican’s employ to justify their positioning goes something like this. The other Modern Democratic Governmental Forms: like Socialism (where the government immediately gratifies the existence of its democratic constituents in terms of the government), Communism (where its democratic constituents could only be within the government), and fascism (where the government is of higher import than its democratic constituents, the citizens sacrificial in nature), fail to create a true freedom from the government (where our ‘Representational’ government is only tied to its democratic constituent as far as the democratic constituent feels the government has represented them) within the government, and harness that power of freedom (the democratic constituents’ Will works in making a government that represents them, alongside their forms of resistance and adherence, failure and success, love and hate [Criminality and Lawfulness]). Our system realizes (a ‘Republican’ might say) that the government's reach is purely symbolic and can only affect those who let themselves get caught up in its workings, it sets up borders (and laws within to give meaning to those borders) only as far as the state’s democratic architects want to raise them in freedom’s name, and has its dutiful criminal cross those borders when freedom demands it [In this way, both ears listen to her, and both hands build her works, one steady, one free].


In the end, they would say, ‘this is the path that can actualize the most freedom using modern standards’ (exemplified by Churchill’s classical conservative retort to what he sees as false governmental forms). But I would go a step farther and claim, ‘this was the only way freedom could have been actualized, from its beginnings’ (trailing into the beyond of what is possible now, eventually freeing us), by properly politicizing every desire [Identity Politics, and those who make it up], letting information wash over this desire’s wish for the world [Real to Fake News, and the process in between], cleanly allowing this desire to finally stand free in the world [That it begins to see itself next to the factual world’s initial oppressive occurrence {changing our historical state}], empowering the individual when they climb atop the state [That an election should never be something that proves the minority wrong, but what gives the majority an opportunity to prove themselves right, alongside the rights of others].


We have elected politicians to represent our ideals, but their usefulness runs them thinner and thinner with time. First we elected the stout, simple made-of-the-land Politician with the task of jury rigging the bare necessities of our legal life, through whatever Antique, Europine, and Domestic product proved useful for reaching at a deeper freedom (say in the ground, in the dirt), striving to be one thing (and in that one thing, becoming one thing, a digger at truths). After their success, we had for a time sat in a glut of freedom’s inert happiness, drawing it from a well. From this relative abundance, we started to prefer the duplicitous ‘two-facing’ politician who knew better how to prepare the cup of freedom to our tastes (by their airs, by their breath), failing equally to represent both sides of America (not giving out the states bread to those with oil to dip them in, dipping their bread so lightly in their own shallow pools as to basically just be eating bread). These hypocrites made politicians have proved too light for the American Paradox [Criminals with a state, trying to make laws without criminals], and the people stand divided together, saying they are America, each and every one. They will represent themselves.


“We needed the electoral college to teach us how to stand on our own achord, but we need it no more” they cry, cheerfully, awaiting their diplomas. “Tut-tut” reply the Republic’s instructors, not yet retired, “Graduating is only half the fun. How will you use that knowledge? How will you prove that knowledge?”. But the young do not listen to the windbags, they are fed up on their hypocrisies. They have new identities, and these new identities will be their politicians (and they try at their concerts in unison, with cigarette lighters and cell phones bright, to catch sight upon that colorless oil, so they can finally walk the cinders of the stuffy old state, and purge that many voiced stench lingering upon everyone’s nose, and the brilliance of the flames will show us dancing with shadows, and all will be warmed again, and none shall be burned) The youthful idealism pangs faithfully against the cynical, hardened arteries of the old conservative’s bell-shaped heart.


It rings.

“True, you’re resistant now, the flame small, the candle sure.”

“But you’ll learn of the real world, and its ways, sooner or later”


Scene B: The Loss of a New York State (of Mind)





The Average Joe hears news that the rules are changing in the big cities. A buddy told it to him once, while Joe was slowly bathed in oil from his t~rusty old steed. He’s been fighting the wilderness for years now, all on his lonesome (though not the real wilderness, mind you, since that had been made anthropogenic by those that came before us long ago). Keeping that lonely vigil on his post at the edge of town, eating dinner with the tv. He’s been losing touch with the reality of his situation. Pretty soon the congressman that answers to him about all this, will be out of a job. And poor old Joe’s going to have to listen (for the first time in his life, mind you), to what other people have to say. Average, Joe hasn’t been to the city for anything but sightseeing, and doesn't know much about the people who live there (those people he’ll be reporting to, come their change, mind you). Joe, he doesn’t know if he can trust them. And by the way they speak to him, he doesn’t know if he can trust them. He tries to listen, but he never learned how. Losing more of himself each day, all he has now are questions (which, at one of his pity parties, he openly asked to no one, who was in attendance).


“You can have some food from the Government’s Pocket.

But are you going to clean up after yourselves?

or are we going to have to do that too.”


“You can have houses ordered deep within the Government’s Pocket.

But are you going to keep the house in order?

or are we going to have to do that too.”


“You can drive to work in your Government’s Pocket.

But are you going to take care of your car?

or are we going to have to do that too.”


No one answers Joe. No one hears him. No one cares.

All his life, Joe had liked the symbolism that the government had a hand in his pocket, and what that prison mile metaphor said about their relationship. He doesn’t like the fact that he’ll soon be forced to dip his own hands in, and grab hold for dear life, like everybody else.


Let’s hear it for Joe

-Politikos


0 comments

Recent Posts

See All