The Fallacy of Candidates and Issues

[unusualmusic_lj_archive]

*Blink*

And so, being unable to sleep, I wonder over to The Infamous Brad, and get an perspective change upside the head at 5:00 in the morning. (yes I haven't slept all night. It's normal, now) Anyway, go read! And tell me what you think.


In a 1979 reprint of an interview he gave to Conspiracy Digest (reprinted in The Illuminati Papers), Robert Anton Wilson said this: "The difference between me and Conspiracy Digest is that CD defines the Power Elite as somebody else. I always define the Power Elite as myself and my friends. ... Brain power (the work of all artists, scientists, and symbolizers since the dawn of humanity, but particularly those of the nineteenth century) created the 'real world' over which monopolists fight each other in the twentieth century. Similarly, Brain power right now, today, is creating the 'real world' of the twenty-first century, over which monopolies will then be struggling. The Brain people create the realities over which the Power people fight each other, and the Brain people even create the techniques of the fight."

Think I'm blowing smoke? Consider this. Republican political candidates campaigned on ending welfare from 1936 to the present. And for the first forty years of that, any candidate who campaigned on "ending welfare" got completely trounced at the polls, was reduced to an asterisk in history, and you've never heard of almost any of them. Then all of a sudden in 1980 one candidate ran on "ending welfare as we know it" and won handily. You hear this pitched as proof of just what an incredibly effective political campaigner he was (or he hired), but that ignores something rather substantial and important: before Reagan even declared his candidacy for national office, the public had turned against welfare. And their opinions changed because the people who were trying to change the country smartened up and stopped funding candidates; what they funded was writers and speakers, through institutions like the Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute. Reagan simply had the good fortune to be the anti-welfare candidate who was running when the public changed their minds. In fact, the public had changed their minds so thoroughly that for the next 20 years, no Democrat could win any statewide or national election without also being anti-welfare.

Comments

[hematopoetic.livejournal.com]

It's only 1 a.m. here. I'm trying to do homework and reading your LJ instead.

[unusualmusic.livejournal.com]

*grins* Go do your homework! Seriosuly though, have you read the article, and what do you think of it?

and as with everything these days, I have to put it in the context of the primaries...

[leneypoo.livejournal.com]

I'm not so sure how that's conspiracy theory and not plain common sense.

See John McCain "not knowing" what his policy is on STDs/Sex Ed so he can't alienate the conservative base. "I'm sure I must have had a position on that somewhere...let me check" (to which I say, 'how the fuck did this guy get the nomination?')

Moneyquote for me:

And in fact, I'm at a total loss as to why any reasonably savvy adult actually listens to the details of what any politician says about any issue. No matter what they say now, we know what they're going to vote for: they're going to vote for what the public tells them to vote for, if they can do so within the constraints of their own political party.

I've never seen the president as the person writing up all the bills. Just the person who is going to have an agenda and figure out how they're going to convince people to come to a positive consensus on it.

George W. Bush did it with the evil terrorists are here to take away your freedom, so would you mind handing it to us for safe-keeping bullshit. Hillary Clinton (okay she wasn't president, but still) failed because she kept her damn healthcare plan so secret she pissed people who had the power to help off and couldn't convince the public it was something they wanted.

It reminds me of the Obama supporter who was surprised interviewed, Derrick Ashong(?). He summed up why Healthcare hasn't gone anywhere despite being an issue since the 80s--there was no political will from the people to have healthcare.

As for me, after reading that article it only impresses on me how politically savvy Obama is. He's basically trying to convince America that being liberal/progressive is common sense. And he's been talking about the need for people to become politically active and aware--something that his opponents haven't (won't) been saying.

Re: and as with everything these days, I have to put it in the context of the primaries...

[unusualmusic.livejournal.com]

i pretty much agree with this analysis.