Home
Refresh   Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...)  (less...)
Add to My Group
October 31, 2007 at 09:01:24

View Ratings | Rate It

A "Two-Headed Party," and the Power of a Dime

submit to twitter
submit to reddit
submit to digg
Tell A Friend

By Bernard Weiner, The Crisis Papers (about the author)     Page 1 of 3 page(s)

opednews.com     Permalink

For OpEdNews: Bernard Weiner - Writer

By Bernard Weiner, The Crisis Papers

In essays over the past two weeks, I've speculated about the reasons for the dangerous timidity of our Democratic Party leaders, and came up with quite a number of possibilities. ( www.crisispapers.org/essays7w/wimps.htm ) But, as many letter-writers reminded me, I might have left out the main one:

It's not that Dem leaders are conned or frightened by the Republicans, they say. No, the Dems act they way they do because they actually believe much of what the Republicans believe, and/or are beholden to the same corporate lobbie$ and media giant$ that get them elected and re-elected.


The essence of the argument is this: There is actually only one party in America -- with a Republican head and a Democratic head -- controlled by the political/economic elite that really runs things. (Sometimes this elite is termed "the oligarchy," or "the plutocrats," or, simply, "the Establishment.")

No wonder there is such frustration and anger in the Democratic and Republican bases: The national elections, to many, are meaningless. It doesn't matter which party is in the White House or which controls Congress, this argument goes, since the outcomes will be more or less the same, arranged by the same power forces that control the political and economic realities.

Given this belief, it's no wonder so many citizens don't vote or are so cynical about their elected officials and the possibility of real change. America needs a seismic political shakeup, but how can major change occur when the system is rigged in support of the ongoing status quo?

So let's take some time to explore these arguments and see where they lead us. No doubt, we will return to this issue as we get closer to the presidential election of November 2008 -- especially if citizens have to decide whether the "lesser of two evils" yet again should get their vote -- but let's at least plant some seeds of thought now and see what grows.

TAKING THE LONNNNGGGG VIEW

If one were to take a really long-range view of American politics, one could ascribe a certain truth to the argument above. America for centuries has been dominated by parties that hover around the center, the parameters of which are set by the "powers that be" in American life.

Sometimes that center is more left-oriented (during FDR's administration in the '30s and '40s, for example, or in the years following Nixon's disgraceful, lawless presidency); sometimes it's more right-oriented (during the term, say, of Reagan). Rarely have we seen such a lying, rampaging, corrupt, take-no-prisoners element in charge, as we have today with the CheneyBush extremists.

But Americans in general, and American corporations in particular, desire stability and predictability. And for that reason, the action invariably returns to the (shifting) center, even if there was a temporary visitation to the outskirts of the party in charge.

Since it costs so much money to finance a viable run for state, Congressional and national office, it follows that most candidates have to get the required cash from somewhere other than their own bank accounts. Who has that kind of money or can raise it fast? The usual suspects: the wealthy, the organized interest groups, the corporations, the lobbyists, et al. Which translates to: Candidates, beholden to these supporters, tend to stay within the ideological/political parameters set by their major donors.

In addition, elected officials and the major candidates generally come from the same wealthy economic/ideological class as their large donors.

LEASHED (OR LEASED) CANDIDATES

The long and short of this situation is that American voters tend to have a severely limited pallet of candidates with which to paint their votes. These candidates more or less agree with one another but hype relatively insignificant differences in order to make the choices seem more dramatic and meaningful than they really are.

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3

 

www.crisispapers.org

Bernard Weiner, Ph.D. in government & international relations, has taught at universities in California and Washington, worked for two decades as a writer-editor at the San Francisco Chronicle, and currently serves as co-editor of The Crisis Papers (more...)
 

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

 

Book Recommendations for "Authoritarianism Constitution The"
Authoritarianism In The Middle East: Regimes And Resistance

$23.50
Lowest New Price $16.49

Number of pages: 275
Publisher: Lynne Rienner Publishers

Modern Authoritarianism: A Comparative Institutional Analysis
by Amos Perlmutter

$22.00

Number of pages: 192
Publisher: Yale Univ Pr

Modern Authoritarianism
by Amos Perlmutter

$8.94

Number of pages: 192
Publisher: Yale University Press

Authoritarianism and Democracy in Europe, 1919-39: Comparative Analyses

$155.00
Lowest New Price $125.33

Number of pages: 368
Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan

View All Book Recommendations

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

FACEBOOK      DIGG THIS      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      NETSCAPE      My Web      Tag!RawSugar      Blink List     (More...)

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
14 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
 

What a bunch of crap thinking by Joel S. Hirschhorn on Wednesday, Oct 31, 2007 at 9:56:11 AM
Ye Olde "Take Over the Dem Party from Inside" gambit -- by Richard Mynick on Wednesday, Oct 31, 2007 at 11:07:50 AM
Bernard Weiner responds by Bernard Weiner on Wednesday, Oct 31, 2007 at 11:47:18 AM
With all respect, Dr Weiner - Let's first note that today's by Richard Mynick on Wednesday, Oct 31, 2007 at 1:59:20 PM
Weiner replies by Bernard Weiner on Wednesday, Oct 31, 2007 at 2:15:59 PM
An opening by Charlie L on Wednesday, Oct 31, 2007 at 2:51:53 PM
Focusing on Nov '08 makes "lesser-evilism" once again the by Richard Mynick on Thursday, Nov 1, 2007 at 10:20:36 AM
DIME'S WORTH by tabonsell on Wednesday, Oct 31, 2007 at 4:31:52 PM
Let's rephrase slightly, for increased accuracy. by Richard Mynick on Wednesday, Oct 31, 2007 at 5:33:55 PM
PATHETIC by tabonsell on Thursday, Nov 1, 2007 at 3:18:45 PM
The first rule of criticizing someone is understanding what by Richard Mynick on Thursday, Nov 1, 2007 at 6:15:53 PM
Catalyst anyone? by boomerang on Wednesday, Oct 31, 2007 at 5:42:23 PM
I agree very much with your comment about "water cooler by Richard Mynick on Wednesday, Oct 31, 2007 at 6:06:31 PM
Excellent Discussion by Bill Tower on Monday, Nov 5, 2007 at 5:57:14 PM

 
Want to post your own comment on this Article? Post Comment


 

 

 

Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews

Powered by Populum