I'm bored with people talking about who they would or wouldn't vote for. Some people mean well and make good points from a purely relative (and often hypothetical) perspective, but they are all ultimately moot.
Democracy, especially, would/can only be efficient and sensible if the constituency were limited and/or cohesive enough to maintain a general consensus about anything; the fact stands that, no matter who ends up as "president of the united states", that person is not ultimately accountable to the people of the country - and has not been for many, many, many........... years, if ever. It's a lovely but utterly naive notion that a government which controls the world image of a group of individuals—of any size or variety—could ever possibly represent any of them to any acceptable degree. Proof? = law enforcement. The very fact that such a concept exists proves that the social construct itself is fundamentally broken. Arguing about its government is moot.
It's pointless to argue or debate about which candidates for X political office are/aren't better/worse than any other, because the greater truth will always be this: if the majority of human beings would just buck the fuck up, pull their heads out of their intellectual anuses, maybe take a little bit of responsibility for themselves and the way they affect other people and the world in general, then government would've remained a failed theory in a classroom somewhere. The fact that it ever existed in the first place is simply a testament to the—evidently—inevitability of human failure.
Government exists solely to sweep under the rug those very real issues which you choose to ignore and/or deny in your day-to-day life, at least as soon as they get so big and spread so far that the average person is savagely beaten by the shortcomings of his or her even-more-ignorant neighbor(s). The problem is that most human beings have chosen not to develop a functional mechanism for implementing a working "group mentality." People butt heads just for the sake of appealing to their insecurities, and as long as that's true, large-scale societies of human beings will NEVER work. Simple logic, folks.
Government has been and always will be a measuring stick propped against the relative decay of humankind. Even the most noble, well-meaning saint of a politician can be and is still a slave to social dysfunction in all the ways that matter. You think your vote counts? – Sure! It does; you can choose who gets elected. You think your vote is capable of effecting the kind of change you pretend you're brave enough to even conceptualize? – You're out of your cotton-pickin' mind. Do you ever actually interact with people, really?
Want to make the world a better place? Get out on the street and start talking to people. Glean what wisdom you can from life and pass it on just because you can. Find out what ails your neighbors, find out how you can help; find out how to help yourselves. Take your absentee ballots and make a fire for a homeless person; use it to start a conversation, and maybe find out just how incredible the depth of human potential is in the right environment. Inspire people to take responsibility for their own problems, instead of shrugging it off onto the shoulders of some pundit who's just another guy/gal with problems of his/her own and no time or life to deal with them - but who gets paid in cash and notoriety for all that denial and self-ignorance. Real people don't have that luxury. Welcome to life, people - it's not a game, so stop thinking in the relative and start realizing the black and white of it all. Quit bitching about which politician is or isn't going to do what to benefit or annoy you, cos in the end only you can be both entitled to and responsible for your own future. (And only you can prevent forest fires?)
Buying into the system just earns you a wool coat. Who cares if it's painted black? You're still a fucking sheep.
The most influential and provocative people in human history have been and always will be the people who answer only to the voice in the back of their head narrating the big picture. The only people who will ever change anything worth changing are those who lead by example. Grass-roots. It's all there is. Individuals interacting with individuals and sharing ideas; it's all that matters.
(For those of you who are ailed by unwavering skepticism even in the face of overwhelming fact, it's not much of a logical leap to deduce that human beings are by nature not well-suited to large-group life. You can do it yourself! Just flick the "Brain" switch to "On" and the "Television" to "Off." Ever hear of the "lowest-common-denominator syndrome"? ... yeah, of course you have. If not, take some basic mathematics (no wonder you don't understand anything) and take a wild guess at what that implies. Now - ever hear of an exception significant enough that it CHANGED the rule? As is hopefully self-evident, of course not. Human behavioral science isn't theoretical; it's empirical.)
The short of it all:
You want to change anything? Change yourself.
I'm sick of people who allow their denial and selective ignorance to push humanity back 10 steps for every 1 step forward.
Genuinely ignorant? –fine, that's not your fault. I'm happy to say I do understand, and I can deal with it. You still have a chance. Discovery isn't implicit. Nobody knows everything from the get-go.
Pull up a chair and let's talk.
In denial? –fine, that's your choice. However, I'm sad to say I also understand YOU, and I'm not going to accept you. You're a waste of a human being, and should be isolated in the intellectual vacuum you choose to live in. You suck the potential out of your environment and the people in it just by being alive.
Get the fuck off my planet.
Governments—and the inane political/social hurricanes swirling around them—inevitably perpetuate the social problems they are created to control. Any and all perceived "benefit" (such as that which is assumed to result from social government) is actually mere "damage control" skewed by generations of immersion in narrow perspective. When a very large 'bad' situation becomes 'better,' that often distracts people from the historical perspective, which is that the situation was ultimately much better than "bad" until a governing body stepped in and ruined things in the first place.
All of the 'progress' people imagine their governments making is an illusion, masking simply the snail-paced return to a balance which should never have been disrupted to begin with - and which will ultimately remain just out of reach, at best. Look at (insert political candidate/leader/officer here) in an objective light, and you'll always see that s/he is merely a giant cyclical fallacy with a face, and who gets paid a salary to maintain the illusion so the intellectually-blind folk don't walk off a cliff. Me, I say let them drown. Cos right now, the human race as a whole is drowning in stagnant mediocrity borne on the back of technological irresponsibility - and that's hardly the worst of it.
Just because we're all capable of surviving—implicitly—from the detached comforts of our living rooms (for now) doesn't mean that we should be allowed to, or should've ever been. Government is by no means the only culprit, but it is one more mechanism by which weak-willed people allow themselves to be convinced that the ultimate responsibility is not only somebody else's to bear, but sometimes actually "beyond their ability" to bear.
It's much more convenient to choose to believe that somebody else is better-qualified to exercise self-control on your behalf, and government is the spitting image of that "somebody." While I could understand why some people buy into it, I'm honestly shocked that almost everybody does! This is the kind of thing people are supposed to grow out of when they start growing body hair and feeling all hot and bothered about the opposite sex. Instead, they just feel all hot and bothered about American Idols and call that a life worth livin'. What a joke!
To summarize: my point is that ANY alternative to government is better in the long run. Even if it kills all of us, it would be utterly irresponsible to continue to allow the tragically obtuse masses to convert everybody else to Lemmingism by sheer force of intellectual anorexia. Unfortunately, the disease has become so rampant that a complete reset of the human species to ground zero is more likely than any real "fix," and that's a reality we'll all soon be faced with - 'opt-in denial' and 'others' alike. I'd much rather die an unknown person of solid principle (and almost certainly will do so) than be just another ethically-ruminant
Ovis Aries.
My personal alternative is to circumvent authority whenever it won't explicitly result in my death or indefinite incarceration, so long as it's possible to live on to fight another day and such a fight has more value than my disappearance/death. I suppose when/if a certain point is reached, those qualifiers will no longer apply. I try to be an example of this; a person of hard-earned and fire-forged principle and character needs no government, and could not possibly gain anything of any real value from one.
A government is like an over-protective and over-exploitative parent; inevitably, its children MUST mature and set out on their own... or they become weak, spoiled, mere leeches in the stagnant pond of society. All the good intentions in the world could never change this. The individual human being needs to simply reformat to the "broad-minded" file system.
"Civil Disobedience" - Henry David Thoreau. Read. One of many underlying points which can be derived from this concept is that reliance upon oneself—self-government, if you will—is the only sustainable form of social order on any scale. While it may be possible to temporarily support a more complex system of government through the extraordinary sacrifices and labors of the individual on behalf of the 'greater good', such efforts will inevitably both fail and cause more long-term harm than short-term benefit.
This is the history of government. This is the future of government. You have a choice. Realizing your options but continuing to stay the same... is the wrong one.
