The Ideals of Politics

In the western world where media saturation is at an all time high politics can be seen as nothing more than two cocks fighting. The issues are always polarized, and any sense of cooperation or corroboration is strictly taboo. The reality is is that there is so much collusion between parties that this media line is quite absurd. Corporate interests trump all others, because the largest tax revenues come from corporations, first from their own taxes, and their employees taxes. Lets also not forget the incredible amount of lobbying (read: wining and dining) that goes on, in addition to campaign donations, and the individual ceases to be the "point".

Now I'm not one to cry about this, because well it is the reality of the situation. The people with access to capital, generally get what they want, because everyone loves capital, including our most upstanding members of government. Now whether in a congress, senate, parliament, or any other form of democratic institution the outcomes of legislation are not encouraged by "small people", but rather lobby groups that tend to be comprised of people directly benefiting from the passing of said legislation. None of this is news, I hope, because the whole process of elections is controlled by party caucus, which is in turn controlled by corporations. If you aren't willing to "play ball" so to speak, you get no playing time. The only time this does not happen is when large parties are considered ineffective, and independents use that momentum to install themselves. In stable democracies, this does not happen.

So what point is there in voting? This is a question lots of people ask, and can find no satisfactory answer when confronted with the above facts. If the candidates are all selected from a pool of "eligibles" what variation can be gained? Now you can always vote for the Green party, or the marijuana party if you are feeling like "wasting a vote", because the mainstream media ensures that only those from dominant parties get any face time, which also includes ads. I mean look at the Conservatives attack on Ignatieff, whose sole issue was the fact he wasn't "Canadian enough". Now this is small ball tactics, and I would have thought Ignatieff smart enough to avoid it, but when he goes on to actually defend himself from the accusations, well you see weakness, and you see susceptibility to outside influences. Now most people recognize this, because if there is one trait humans share with other animals, is that we can smell fear. Another issue is his reluctance to call a vote of no confidence, when failing to do so would only reinforce his own "non confidence" in his party to win. Again people see this.

Now when you recollect this with the above paragraphs you wonder whether it is all orchestrated. There are doubts, and ultimately I don't see what goes on behind those closed doors, but using my eyes, and ears, I cannot help to think that my assumptions are correct. It is all conducted to the tune of an orchestra, the only question is who is the maestro? It certainly isn't Harper, because we should all know the public puppets are only there because of their ability to lie with a smile, and impeccable credentials. Well maybe we all don't know.

Anyways, this wasn't supposed to be about the song and dance of politics, but rather the intentions of it. Now the governance of people is always tricky, and I can understand some reasoning behind the "truthful lie", meaning there are some things people in general would be best not knowing. The logic behind this can't really be touched, because supposing the world's leaders knew of an impending doom the idea of letting people know, is tantamount to giving them a free pass to engage in chaos. No, it is better to keep people in the dark, after all happiness is a fickle business, and knowing too much is not good for the health.

So we have established the reasoning behind the "greater good", and have shown it to be nothing more than an illusion. However, there remains the issue of benefits of policy, and whether or not each party has a distinct platform that significantly differs from their opponents. For the most part the answer is a negative, they share most of the same ideals, because well they have to. The main sticking points in Canada seem to centre on marijuana use, and gay marriage. Thankfully we hurdled one of those, and we have the second in our sights. However, the need to show that power is centred in Ottawa is leading to some dangerous things, but none of that really matters.

Now to get to the really important things. The idea of a government was in my mind relatively simple. It is a group of individuals, who come together to serve the interests of their constituents. This is idyllic, because well some constituents matter more than others, as if frightfully obvious when you consider the tax breaks for corporations (played off as an incentive to invest), and other societal handbrakes for the disadvantaged. Now this might be nit picking, and I am fond of it, but the idea of equal opportunity is something that should be upheld by all people who claim to represent other people. This doesn't mean equal ability, just equal opportunity, so if you fail, at least you know you had a fair chance at it, and same goes if you succeed.

Now this seems to be an elitist proposition, because ability is always keeping with privilege, or so it seems to me. So what to do? How do you make the government equal to all? Do you have a handicapper general? Do you have transparency? Well all of this would make sense, but its not going to happen, solely because the people that go into politics are already successful, and innately believe in one person's right/ability to make for themselves what is not given to them. We chastise those who come from family wealth, while applauding those who built themselves from nothing. This is pretty dangerous in my opinion, for one thing it implies that all success is rooted in monetary advances, and two that it is only a rough cycle, because the self made man spawns the entitled group.

But what to do? What is there to do to change the idea of success, the idea of happiness? Well I'm certainly not going to be making assumptions about people's desires, but I will mention my own. I desire to live in a world where all people have access to water, shelter, and safety.(Clothing optional). I desire to live in a world where potential is not wasted, and that everyone has access to education suitable for them. I desire to have a society that doesn't make assumptions of value of any one person. I desire to have a world that is resistant to prejudice. I desire a world where everyone lives in harmony. I desire a world that cannot be. I desire a world where that last sentence is not true. I desire a home for all.