Philosophy

» pink101 - Your Article

.
You make some good personal points in your article.
.
My personal experience in politics goes back to a time when the political parties were controlled at the grass roots. That's something different.
.
In learning about communications, there was a time in the late ninteenth century when the way in which Americans communicated with each other at the national level changed. I think someone wrote that it was in the 1896 national political conventions. Prior to those events, it was said that communications was hierarchical. Information was spread at the local level from the top down. After that time, communications is said to be horizontal. Information was spread across the nation from central locations--New York City, for example.
.
It took the political parties some time before they gave up on the old precinct method of control and changed to the strong national political parties we have today. But, the information still comes at us from the central locations of New York City as well as Washington, D.C.. That's a thumbnail sketch of the idea I wanted to convey.
.
It is much easier to take control of a political party from the top down than it is from the bottom up. Our Republican and Democratic parties are controlled by powerful forces. At least they have been up and until the present time. I think we're seeing that fall apart.
.
Unions--big unions--took the reins of the Democratic Party and business--big business--took the reins of the Republican Party. Until, strong grass roots movements are, once again, instituted, we will see the failure of our two party system as the lobby interests have taken control of both parties. They fund and pull the strings for either party; so, no matter who wins, we get screwed anyway.
.
Good article. Thanks.
.

-- posted by pink101

» RLSharp - Your Article

In response to Your Article posted by pink101:

Thanks for the history overview. I've often wondered about that but never looked it up. I think your ideas are right too. A true grassroots movement that leads to actual power seems almost impossible now, but it's so basic to the idea of democracy. It SHOULD be possible, but it isn't, and that's a failure in our system.

We do, however, still have grassroots ideologies springing up, such as the Civil Rights movement, issues of gay rights, etc. People get upset about something and make politicians listen. But that's a different issue.

-- posted by RLSharp

» pink101 - Guess

In response to Your Article posted by RLSharp:
.
I wonder what the topic for sermons will be in evangelical churches on Election Day Sunday.
.
Guess.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Migisi - From your article...

"So here I am, once again, stuck contemplating how to vote. I only have two real options (another problem), and I don't like either of them. What to do?"
.
Whew... EXACTLY where I find myself today. IMO, there is another option - though I admit not a practical one. I've decided to go Green for Governor this time. I like the candidate. I know he won't win, and Pink says my Green vote will actually help the incumbent win. But at least my candidate will know he's not alone in his ideas - somebody agrees with him. And I'll be voting for those candidates I agree with... no matter their party. I'll be vote splitting, but that's nothing new for me.

-- posted by Migisi

» Brian Tubbs - Once again...

In response to Guess posted by pink101:

...you seem to single out evangelical churches for their get-out-the-vote efforts as if this is a bad thing.

I think it's GOOD that organizations (churches included) encourage people to vote. One of the things I can't stand is apathy, and any organization (church included) that fights against apathy and indifference earns my thanks and appreciation.

» Brian Tubbs - Protest vote

In response to From your article... posted by Migisi:

Though I personally prefer to make my vote as effective as possible (which means sometimes choosing, in my view, the lesser of two evils), I see the value in sometimes registering a protest vote. It says to the major parties: Your candidates are unacceptable. You need to do better to earn my vote.

The only thing I would suggest here is getting involved at the nomination level. Most party nomination processes, esp at the local and state level, are very open to citizen involvement.

» RLSharp - Protest vote

In response to Protest vote posted by BrianTubbs:

Yeah, the idea of voting for an independent or other third party is tricky. It does split the vote, but the alternative is to vote for the lesser of two evils (from your perspective, if you don't like either major candidate). It's a catch 22 really. If you vote for a third party, your vote won't decide the elections and the person you REALLY don't like might win. But if you don't vote that way, the two party system will always remain. Tough situation.

-- posted by RLSharp

» pink101 - Politics In The Church

In response to Once again... posted by BrianTubbs:
.
"...you seem to single out evangelical churches for their get-out-the-vote efforts as if this is a bad thing."
.
I don't think it is a bad thing from the standing place of the evangelical--it's their right to think what they think and to vote what they vote. But, there are issues involved that your question--sort of--sweeps away.
.
Christianity has become a political issue and the Republican Party leadership includes that in their strategies. I remember when as a boy in the thirties that true Christians were Republicans. It's a long standing position. Democrats were modernists, unionizers, academics, and socialists. Evangelicals tend to vote the Republican ticket four to one. So, the strategy is working. That's fair. So, getting out the evangelical vote is good for the Republican Party. Acting like it isn't, is dishonest. I guess I'm saying that you should admit it.
.
Beside the fact that it is an example of how values can be hijacked it also points up how easily religious people can be duped by their ideologies. And, it's a person's right to be conned if they want to be. Think of the people who are in favor of the war in the Middle East because they believe that it is, somehow, related to God's plans for Israel.
.
I doubt many sermons will outrightly endorse any particular candidates as that could cost that church its tax exempt status. The state of Michigan is issuing warnings to chruches and charity organizations not to endorse candidate on that basis.
.
I don't know, maybe it might be a good idea if churches were able to exercise more politics from the pulpit. Why not? We talk about religion in our political meetings. In fact, the more I think about it, the more I see that it might be proper and good that churches are allowed to come out of the closet in so far as their political preferences on candidates and issues are concerned.
.
By the way, Robert, I wanted to ask if you are familiar with Charles Sanders Pierce as the Father of American Pragmatism.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Migisi - Protest vote

In response to Protest vote posted by RLSharp:

.
But if you don't vote that way, the two party system will always remain. Tough situation.
.
Yes, it's a tough one - one I wrestle with. Nobody wants to 'waste' their vote. But then, I feel like I wasted my votes before - when the guy I elected turned out to be a crook and liar.
.
My husband, who's been a staunch Republican for over 50 years, will not vote straight Republican this year. Like me (an Independent), he's totally disgusted with current leadership, and will vote for candidates who reflect his views - regardless of party. He has echoed your remarks above.
.
I ~never~ thought I'd EVER see the day when he would split his ticket. I think his decision to split his vote is indicative of what many others will do in the privacy of the voting booth.

-- posted by Migisi

» pink101 - I'll Tell You What

In response to Protest vote posted by Migisi:
.
Just in case you don't think it is important that we get a change in our representation, I'll tell you what.
.
If you think things are bad now? Just wait and see what will be happening if the Republicans are able to maintain their majorities after November 7. They will see such a victory as a mandate to carry out their agendas (I know, agendae) to the hilt. They will give new meaning to your loss of liberty.
.
You best be taking that into consideration when you think about staying home from the polls or for casting your votes down a hole.
.
Make in emphatic. Vote Democratic!!
.

-- posted by pink101