The Left/Right Paradigm and The Illusion of Choice

October 17th, 2012 → 6:12 pm @ // No Comments

Different Sides Of The Same Coin

Left versus Right. Liberal versus Conservative. Progressive versus
adherent to existing precedent.

Polarizing viewpoints are continuously highlighted by the truth
managing media. Partisanship is exploited to increase the conflict
between the theoretically balancing halves of the total political
landscape. The illusion of choice is maintained to appease the public
yearning for a say in the way things are run and to give the appearance
of some semblance of fair play. Contrary to the general thought
paradigm, the will of the people, in real effective terms, it is quite moot.
As the election cycle heats up, millions of voters are focused on the
candidates or platforms of the particular political party to which they
have felt affiliation. Often they have followed the advice of family or
friends in order to form their own individual political “leaning” with its
basic platform or orientation. Others have been essentially handed
their specific affiliation, as they were made to identify themselves with
a media image produced to remind them of their own circumstances.
Still others have attempted to make up their own mind by scouring the
news for information that will help them make a choice. After careful
deliberation, based on the information available to them, they may
register to vote as a particular party member, believing they have sided
with other like-minded individuals. They feel their vote will not be
wasted if they add it to a larger collection of voices. They think they
have picked sides.

There does exist a duality to government and to society, but it is not
the simplistic and incendiary tribalism of left versus right, or one
political party versus another. It is the less visible distinction of the tiny
minority of chief executives, legislators, justices that are
uncompromised in their duty to public service as elected
representatives, plus what remains of the free press, primarily in
alternative media, along with true free-market proponents all on the
one side, versus the bought and-paid-for, over-arching machinery of the
corrupt political system as orchestrated by the power-broker elite on
the other. The control that the elite enjoy over the political, legal, and
therefore economic landscape is in two major areas, these are in the
influencing of elections and in the direct influencing of the decisions
made by officials once they are in office.

This has the effect of rendering democracy, as practiced by the US
and other developed countries, a shallow fraud. Few candidates today,
most particularly for national elections, are in any remote way “the
People’s Choice” for who should run for office. Candidates are handpicked
by the moneyed elite, often very early in their careers. They may
be tapped and slated for office even before they have demonstrated
any aspirations for public service, such as while still in college or military
service. Ambitious or ego-driven personalities are carefully shopped for
the candidate mills of local party politics. Contribution money blurs the
lines of ethics and idealism and the promise is made to them that they
will go far if they voice support for their patrons. As a candidate shows
potential to rise in the political hierarchy, they are plied with more
money, favor, and countless other forms of largess designed to buy
their loyalty. If they are given to indulgence, that will be enabled and
encouraged as well, so as to provide a potential means of further
control in the future through the threat of exposure of their scandalous
excess. Any weakness in the candidate’s character, be it greed or
obsession, is a potential tool for coercive manipulation by the
candidate’s “handlers.”

In our information overloaded world, electability of a candidate is
more about positive widespread media exposure and opinion than
anything else. Campaign advertising has become a grotesquely unfair
arena where the more money that is applied the more exposure can be
bought. This creates a built in lop-sidedness in favor of whichever
candidate the money lines up behind. The electoral process in the
United States has largely become mere theatre which is maintained, like
so much else in the present climate, so as to not alarm the public and
create a backlash.

By pretending that the voters, and by extension the ones they
“elect”, are in charge, the controlling insiders transcend political cycles
in their multi-generational agendas to sap more money and power from
their surroundings.

Money is used as a tool by those that have it to get what they want.
It is no mystery that real international wealth carries the power to
influence opinion and legislation, as it is so aptly said that, “money
talks” and “he who has the gold makes the rules” From a profitability
standpoint, influence that can be gained through the use of money is
potentially a great investment. Over and again through history, we see
examples of international money influencing the proceedings of ruling
and legislative bodies inside government at any level. It is so pandemic
that it is almost ignored as part of the normal scenery. In the timehonored
method of using money to buy influence, the moneyed elite
ingratiate themselves to targeted candidates with the blandishments
that opulence can provide.

Occasionally, a particularly ugly example of bribery or influence
peddling will surface that will get the attention of the public. When
enough of a pattern is detected, in for example the effect of excessive
campaign contributions, the calls for reform go forth. These become
opportunities for the money powers to turn the game further in their
favor. Such a ball in play can be fielded by the elite through the use of
the officials they own and have selected and groomed for public office.
Money-puppet lawmakers may appear to take up a populist cause on
the surface, but are actually just co-opting the momentum of that
cause. These same individuals will do the opposite of what they have
led their constituency to believe they would do and actually sponsor
legislation that will either neutralize any attempt at reform or insulate
the interests of the back-room powers.

The elite’s political puppets are expendable, and may be sacrificed
on the altar of expedience in order, for example, to push unpopular but
time-sensitive legislation. If the puppet lawmaker must be let fall to low
opinion, it is worth it, if the background agenda can go forward. A
popular political asset may enjoy a long tenure of consecutive terms
which enables the gradual development of complex hidden agendas
through the patient implementation of small but compounding steps.
Party affiliations are expendable as well. When the political climate
within a party has become unprofitable or potentially hostile to the
moneyed elite, they alternate to working through favorable members of
the opposition party. Through the careful placement of controlled
officials in either camp, their agendas go forward regardless of party
affiliation. It is always the same agenda in place, and it is always the
same group who are in power.

The actions of the imperialist ruler-ship, often contrary to the
structure and laws of rightful governance, are laundered through layers
of carefully selected, nurtured, and placed officials and lawmakers
giving them the appearance of representing the will and authority of the
populace. If there are any repercussions, it is often portrayed by the
elite-owned media as having been the fault of the voters for not having
thrown the bums out of office any sooner. Whenever it becomes
necessary to cover the tracks of the elite, the media makes sure that the
world understands that it was the people of the United States that
dropped the bombs, or seized the oil field, or littered the economy with
derivatives swindles. It matters not whether none of the American
people actually had the chance to say anything about it.

The populace is slowly awakening to the fact that there is no real
democracy at work. It is becoming less obscured that the real duality in
politics and society is in the contrast between the moneyed elite versus
everyone else.


Tags: , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply