With minimal effort, there has been real success with the left and right working together. Rather than demonize the Rage Against the War Machine rally, left-right cooperation should be expanded.
Fantastic article for many reasons. We are barely a democracy. The problem I find is no one is talking repeatedly and coherently about viable solutions. You stated that war needs fear. I believe the government needs the people to fear as a form of control and the role as hero/savior with war is a ploy. Keeping in mind Biden’s approval ratings at the start of our war with Russia under the guise of once again “bringing democracy” to a poor oppressed and threatened nation”) it all plays so well here because we need so much to believe it. Viable other parties would go a very long way in changing this and a meaningful vote is what democracy demands. Good for you.
Yes, Sam. A good argument. Getting this across to the chauvinistic liberals is really difficult. But we must keep trying. As long as this polarization grows, the chance of a third voice is slimmer. But maybe not. Maybe from that gap, the seeds of an alternative will take root. Many thanks
Fully agree, and I think that another profoundly important and crucial piece of the puzzle of dismantling the two-party oligarchy and its war machine is a change in the incredibly un-representitive un-democratic and un-just electoral system, from the abysmal 'winner takes all' (that ensures the continued rule of the two party oligarchy) to a combination of ranked choice and proportional representation in the case of congress - half of the reprsentitives chosen in congressional districts via ranked choice, and the other half chosen via a country-wide proportional representation of parties, as it is in the vast majority of the world (this is especially where other parties, besides the DNC and GOP, will be able to come in and completely change the name of the game).
And in the case of the president, a change from the abysmal anti-democeatic un-representitive and un-just electoral college system of 'winner takes' all to a country-wide ranked choice.
As for senate - the most un-representitive and anti-democratic of all (which gives conservatives enormous advantage as it gives exact equal representation to a sparsely populated conservative states like Wyoming as it does to heavily populated liberal states like California which is 60 times Wyoming's size in people yet gets exact same representation), if this anti-democratic institution should continue at all, then the most just and representitive thing to do would be to choose the senators in a country-wide proportional representation, or, if it must stay at the state level then each state should receive the amount of senators that corresponds to its size and these (in each state) should be chosen in a ranked choice manner.
Ranked choice should also apply for choosing governors and mayors, and proportional representation should also apply for state houses of representitives and senates.
In addition to that, people should have the option of calling a referendum on any issue they wish when, say, 20% of residents in an area (state, county, municiplaity or entire country) indicate their interest to hold such referendum.
Such electoral reform would undoubtedly dismantle the two-party oligarchy and break the field right open for people to choose who they REALLY want and have our voice truly heard.
I was really disappointed to see that electoral reform, which is absolutely essential and vital component of dismantling the war machine, was not included in the ten-point demands of the Feb19 rally.
Agree, but such reforms are largely dependent on asking the system to sign its own death warrant. The great thing about VotePact is that it's DIY -- See --
The red and blue political party marketing brands are owned and operated by the same small group of financiers. To see these private organizations as independent parties is the black & white logical fallacy, that there are only two choices and that these two entities are it. You also seem to ignore the existence of agent provocateurs and saboteurs used by intelligence agencies to commit violence to justify state terrorism.
“We must keep the people busy with political antagonisms. We’ll therefore speed up the question of (fill in the blank) within the Democratic Party; and we’ll put the spotlight on (fill in the blank) [for] the Republican Party. By dividing the electorate in this way, we’ll be able to have them spend their energies at struggling amongst themselves on questions that, for us, have no importance whatsoever.” —US Bankers magazine, 1892 (Sarah E. Van De Vort Emery, Imperialism in America: Its Rise and Progress, Emery & Emery, 1893, pp. 71-72, as quoted in the Chicago Daily Press)
Yes, divide and conquer is an old strategy. Mario on Maneco64 youtube channel read an excerpt from The Nameless War about how the bankers set up the party system back in 1694 after they got their private Bank of England established- it was a deliberate strategy to keep the people divided and fighting with each other so they would never come together against them.
And good quote from Sarah Emery. I read this book of hers years ago:
Seven Financial Conspiracies which Have Enslaved the American People by Sarah E. Van de Vort Emery
If there is anything that will frighten the men in the shadows it is cooperation. They make a huge effort to divide us.
Fantastic article for many reasons. We are barely a democracy. The problem I find is no one is talking repeatedly and coherently about viable solutions. You stated that war needs fear. I believe the government needs the people to fear as a form of control and the role as hero/savior with war is a ploy. Keeping in mind Biden’s approval ratings at the start of our war with Russia under the guise of once again “bringing democracy” to a poor oppressed and threatened nation”) it all plays so well here because we need so much to believe it. Viable other parties would go a very long way in changing this and a meaningful vote is what democracy demands. Good for you.
Yes to Vote Pack!
Pact!
Yes, Sam. A good argument. Getting this across to the chauvinistic liberals is really difficult. But we must keep trying. As long as this polarization grows, the chance of a third voice is slimmer. But maybe not. Maybe from that gap, the seeds of an alternative will take root. Many thanks
Terrific article.
Fully agree, and I think that another profoundly important and crucial piece of the puzzle of dismantling the two-party oligarchy and its war machine is a change in the incredibly un-representitive un-democratic and un-just electoral system, from the abysmal 'winner takes all' (that ensures the continued rule of the two party oligarchy) to a combination of ranked choice and proportional representation in the case of congress - half of the reprsentitives chosen in congressional districts via ranked choice, and the other half chosen via a country-wide proportional representation of parties, as it is in the vast majority of the world (this is especially where other parties, besides the DNC and GOP, will be able to come in and completely change the name of the game).
And in the case of the president, a change from the abysmal anti-democeatic un-representitive and un-just electoral college system of 'winner takes' all to a country-wide ranked choice.
As for senate - the most un-representitive and anti-democratic of all (which gives conservatives enormous advantage as it gives exact equal representation to a sparsely populated conservative states like Wyoming as it does to heavily populated liberal states like California which is 60 times Wyoming's size in people yet gets exact same representation), if this anti-democratic institution should continue at all, then the most just and representitive thing to do would be to choose the senators in a country-wide proportional representation, or, if it must stay at the state level then each state should receive the amount of senators that corresponds to its size and these (in each state) should be chosen in a ranked choice manner.
Ranked choice should also apply for choosing governors and mayors, and proportional representation should also apply for state houses of representitives and senates.
In addition to that, people should have the option of calling a referendum on any issue they wish when, say, 20% of residents in an area (state, county, municiplaity or entire country) indicate their interest to hold such referendum.
Such electoral reform would undoubtedly dismantle the two-party oligarchy and break the field right open for people to choose who they REALLY want and have our voice truly heard.
I was really disappointed to see that electoral reform, which is absolutely essential and vital component of dismantling the war machine, was not included in the ten-point demands of the Feb19 rally.
Agree, but such reforms are largely dependent on asking the system to sign its own death warrant. The great thing about VotePact is that it's DIY -- See --
https://fairvote.org/votepact_do_it_yourself_voting_reform/
The red and blue political party marketing brands are owned and operated by the same small group of financiers. To see these private organizations as independent parties is the black & white logical fallacy, that there are only two choices and that these two entities are it. You also seem to ignore the existence of agent provocateurs and saboteurs used by intelligence agencies to commit violence to justify state terrorism.
“We must keep the people busy with political antagonisms. We’ll therefore speed up the question of (fill in the blank) within the Democratic Party; and we’ll put the spotlight on (fill in the blank) [for] the Republican Party. By dividing the electorate in this way, we’ll be able to have them spend their energies at struggling amongst themselves on questions that, for us, have no importance whatsoever.” —US Bankers magazine, 1892 (Sarah E. Van De Vort Emery, Imperialism in America: Its Rise and Progress, Emery & Emery, 1893, pp. 71-72, as quoted in the Chicago Daily Press)
Robert Bows
https://coloradopublicbanking.blogspot.com/2020/07/the-second-wave-of-pushback.html
Yes, divide and conquer is an old strategy. Mario on Maneco64 youtube channel read an excerpt from The Nameless War about how the bankers set up the party system back in 1694 after they got their private Bank of England established- it was a deliberate strategy to keep the people divided and fighting with each other so they would never come together against them.
And good quote from Sarah Emery. I read this book of hers years ago:
Seven Financial Conspiracies which Have Enslaved the American People by Sarah E. Van de Vort Emery
https://archive.org/details/sevenfinancialc00emergoog/page/n6/mode/2up
"dedicated to the enslaved people of a dying republic"
Sam Husseini, when will Vote Pact (the site) be viable again, to recommend to the apparently growing list of candidates AND candidate interviewers?
You sir are a liar. https://twitter.com/CarlBeijer/status/1626993242670608384/photo/2
Not even Beijer claims I lied. Which I think makes you the liar. https://twitter.com/samhusseini/status/1627164599526076416