I fear we have become too stupid to keep the Republic.

[dawg]

For God's sake, somebody tell me I'm wrong!

It is a proven fact that the corporate class can lead 25-35% of us by the nose, probably even to the point of violence if they pressed hard enough. Another 25-35% of us are so uninformed and apathetic they can't be bothered to vote. And it they do vote, they make their choices based on random-assed criteria such as who's taller, who likes their kind of sports, who looks better in a suit, etc.

That leaves only 30-50% of the electorate that can be considered anywhere close to rational. Essentially, the only hope for effective government is for all of those rational voters to pull together. But we don't do that. What we do, in the rare event that we ever win power at a national level, is to immediately assemble the circular firing squad.

Health care reform is a case in point. No plan that does anything positive at all will ever poll above 50% once the "interests" mount their campaign against it. That is because only 50% (at the most) of the country is actually interested in effective self-government. What happens, then, if a third of liberals decide not to support reform efforts because they don't go far enough? It means that the only way reform ever happens in this country is if a Democratic Congress and a Democratic President are willing to pass and sign reforms that are polling at 35-40%. That may be what happens, and if so, it will be a remarkable accomplishment for the President and the Congressional majorities. But it shouldn't have to be this way.

[villager]

1. I wish I could tell you you were wrong.

n/t

[villager]

2. 'puter dupe

n/t

[StarfarerBill]

3. Yes, sadly...

...proud ignorance has become enshrined as the national way-of-life.

[Political Heretic]

6. Yes, the problem is all those "other people" are just too ignorant...

mmmhmmm....

[dawg]

11. You're damn right those "other" people are stupid!

For crying out loud, they think they are fighting to keep the govenment's hands out of their Medicare!

[FiveGoodMen]

16. Are you saying that we are just as ignorant?

I catch the sarcasm, but not the point.

[dawg]

23. He's saying that my original post was stupid.

Even when venting, you see, it's not right to criticize the great and noble proletariat. It's not his fault that he lines up year after year to vote for conservatives, goes to tea parties, calls the President a socialist, and essentially enables his own economic demise.

[tabasco]

38. Yep. Those stupid motherfuckers with the Holocaust signs

protesting against expanded health care for Americans.

Goddamn right it's those "other people."

[leveymg]

4. In the end, we'll support the Bill, but won't be too eager to work to return Dems to Congress

This has been a particularly discouraging process, and I blame the Blue Dogs like Baucus most of all along with a highly ineffective leadership. Reid has been a total disaster, but it looks like the only way he'll be pried out of the Majority Leader seat is if he's defeated.

[Political Heretic]

5. This anti-people, blame masses first, dren is typical upper middle class rhetoric

"Our problem is that ordinary people are too stupid to take care of themselves."

No, our problem is a system by the privileged for the privileged. Why should anyone else bother with it?

No one ever bothers to consider that perhaps the reason some people are so-called "uninformed" about national politics whether they are informed or not really wouldn't change the direction of a system that is owned by rulers, dominated by power and privilege and functions to maintain the interests of a select few. Perhaps they're not "uninformed" because they are stupid, but rather uninformed because there's no reason to be informed.

If you think that if somehow ordinary Americans suddenly became "informed" and decided to vote for candidates who put social and economic justice for the poor first, these candidates would get elected and then go on to transform the system for the better - you're nuts. The absolute stranglehold of financial power dominates national politic. If people ever truly organized to engage in this political process and overthrow the ruling class that dominates it right now, you would quickly see how ruthlessly the powerful would fight to prevent any serious change from happening. And they would win. Just like they are winning now on health care, on economic reform, on a host of issues.

People don't need to be "more informed" about the state of our national politics. People need to be more fed up, and ready to unite and mobilize for something new.

[Fire1]

12. Couldn't have said it better, myself. n/t

[FiveGoodMen]

18. "People need to be more fed up, and ready to unite and mobilize for something new"

That's also what the tea-baggers think.

It seems to me that being informed is essential in choosing which side to be on.

Just being fed up isn't nearly good enough.

[Political Heretic]

32. Being informed? Yes. Being informed about a political process that doesn't give a damn about you?

No.

Being "informed" can mean many other things besides keeping up on the latest news or corporate sponsored policy written by corporate financed legislators with corporate and financial interests prioritized as number one.

For example, being "informed" could also mean awakening to the reality that this is the political system we have, that does not in any real sense prioritize or reflect the needs and interests of the poor. The poor turning away from a system that does not work for them is not necessarily "ignorant." It's fairly understandable.

[FiveGoodMen]

36. What system did you have in mind to replace this one?

[Political Heretic]

37. That's not what comes first. What comes first is accepting reality about this system.

That's step one.

For step "two," I'll be happy to participate with the people as they decide on the details of a system that doesn't treat the poor and working class as second class citizens. Any system that isn't based on the exploitation of the poor will be fine with me.

If there's no historical precedent we can turn to for inspiration, then I suggest we keep overthrowing classist systems that are run by the privileged for the benefit of the privileged until we find one that does successfully keep the interests of ordinary people first, and the principles of economic justice first, or until we all die - whichever comes first.

For my part, I'm still interested in exploring the notion of a sustainable market-based system that was built on the ideas of cooperative/participatory economics. In place of "free market" ideology, fair market ideology, with checks and balances in oversight and regulation coming from broader participation and worker-owned, worker managed, worker regulated systems.

Could be a failed idea. Many leftists think I'm part of the problem for suggesting such a thing. Might not work. But let's keep trying. And I don't know what the failure or success of alternative ideas has to do with whether or not we "accept" this system that is most certainly violently exploitative, corrupt, and failing the poor.

[reggie the dog]

21. I disagree. People need to be led too sometimes

FDR led the people. If we lead, and actually put social and economic justice for the poor, and working class, and yes the middle class in the forefront, pass reforms people will feel and see first hand (health care) then the people who see no reason to vote will suddenly see a great reason to vote democrat.

[Political Heretic]

29. FDR didn't lead people. FDR was led by people.

Is a difference in class perspective. The privileged look down at the masses and say "you need someone to tell you what's best for you, because you're too ignorant and stupid to take care of yourselves."

The masses look up at the privileged and say, "we will do for ourselves unless or until someone emerges who will do what we demand, because you are too self-absorbed and self-righteous to take care of us." FDR only did what FDR did because of mass pressure from the working class, during a period of depression when the stranglehold of business and financial power was weakened, and popular unrest had its best potential to be influential.

[treestar]

31. They have to vote first

geez. You mean they won't vote until they get what they would have gotten had they voted? Then just vote!

[Political Heretic]

34. They don't have to vote first. And "just vote?" Really?

The notion that somehow if poor people "just voted" a radically different national politic would emerge is tragically misguided.

This is a system in which money and power are the ultimate dictators of political office. The financially privileged and powerful can spend untold billions upon billions of dollars ensuring that their agenda is secure, and that no reforms will ever be significantly damaging to their bottom line - usually they end up being profitable.

Just vote? You can't even be a candidate without raising millions of dollars. When was the last time a poor person making an income just above the poverty line was elected to any national office? The answer might possibly be never. Without being upper middle class or better to start with, you can't even get in the game. You don't have enough money to advertise, to get the word out to enough rural voters or persons in poverty to even know your name, while your corporate-sponsored candidate has unlimited money to blanket every square inch of property with ads, be on tv, on radio, in newspapers, and sending pamphlets right to your door saying how he's going to "look out for you!"

Just vote? The voting choice is frequently between candidates who both take money from the same coffer of power and privilege.

Just vote? Let's just ignore the wide-scale instances of vote suppression, voter misdirection, and voter intimidation that targets poor people. Let's ignore state laws that ban anyone with a felony conviction from voting (no poor does not equal criminal, but it is a matter of fact that there is a connection between criminal convictions and poverty) that disproportionally eliminates poor people from the voter rolls.

Just vote? Let's just ignore documented instances of voter purges, targeting poor districts and poor communities. Just vote? Let's ignore the increased difficult of voting when you don't have transportation, or you are working three jobs to feed your family.

And people wonder why I talk about class bias here at du.

[treestar]

30. If those 20% the OP mentioned would get out and vote it would be

different. They can sit home and cry about privilege, but it is their own doing.

It's not that hard to be informed. There are public libraries. Newspapers are cheap. These people have no excuse.

[Political Heretic]

35. I don't know who you mean by "these people" who are "crying" about privilege, but....

The notion that somehow if poor people "just voted" a radically different national politic would emerge is tragically misguided.

This is a system in which money and power are the ultimate dictators of political office. The financially privileged and powerful can spend untold billions upon billions of dollars ensuring that their agenda is secure, and that no reforms will ever be significantly damaging to their bottom line - usually they end up being profitable.

Just vote? You can't even be a candidate without raising millions of dollars. When was the last time a poor person making an income just above the poverty line was elected to any national office? The answer might possibly be never. Without being upper middle class or better to start with, you can't even get in the game. You don't have enough money to advertise, to get the word out to enough rural voters or persons in poverty to even know your name, while your corporate-sponsored candidate has unlimited money to blanket every square inch of property with ads, be on tv, on radio, in newspapers, and sending pamphlets right to your door saying how he's going to "look out for you!"

Just vote? The voting choice is frequently between candidates who both take money from the same coffer of power and privilege.

Just vote? Let's just ignore the wide-scale instances of vote suppression, voter misdirection, and voter intimidation that targets poor people. Let's ignore state laws that ban anyone with a felony conviction from voting (no poor does not equal criminal, but it is a matter of fact that there is a connection between criminal convictions and poverty) that disproportionally eliminates poor people from the voter rolls.

Just vote? Let's just ignore documented instances of voter purges, targeting poor districts and poor communities. Just vote? Let's ignore the increased difficult of voting when you don't have transportation, or you are working three jobs to feed your family.

And people wonder why I talk about class bias here at du.

[sendero]

40. If the "average american"..

... weren't such a DUMB FUCK, we wouldn't have a system by the privileged for the privileged. He/She voted for it day fucking in and day fucking out. I agree with the OP.

[Political Heretic]

7. [TAG] - this thread has been tagged as example of bourgeios underground in action.

marked for future reference.

[ElboRuum]

10. Real mature. n/t

[dawg]

19. Want to know what's bourgeois ...

Sitting around dreaming revolutionary socialist pipe dreams, all the while casting aspersions at those deluded people who still believe in trying to change things through the democratic process.

[ElboRuum]

8. I think you may be partially wrong.

The first 25-35% can be easily led, and so long as what they are led to requires no effort on their part, they'll go along willingly. Ask them to do something about it, and that percentage drops dramatically.

The second 25-35% may not be apathetic, but they'll buy what people tell them. Unfortunately, we don't live in times where the media focuses on issues, and when they do actually manage to, it's biased and often blatantly misrepresentative of the facts.

The 30%-50% rational section you mentioned must not be as rational as you claim, because it is an irrational act to assemble the circular firing squad.

I realize that the picture I paint here is as grim as the one you paint. But if being partially wrong will make you feel better about things, maybe in these ways you are, even if the alternative analysis is bleak. Hope you feel better.

[MercutioATC]

9. You're overestimating the "rational" number.

I'd place it between 10% and 15%.

Otherwise, you're correct.

[Fumesucker]

13. You're wrong...

We became too stupid back when Ronaldus Maximus was enthroned as Emperor.

I remember arguing with some of my blue collar coworkers about Reagan at the time, it was utterly hopeless then and it is more so now.

It's morning in the Shining City on the Hill, wake up and smell the napalm.

[reggie the dog]

22. if the democrats put programs in place to help the working class

the working class would not vote Republican.

[Fumesucker]

25. If you pull hard enough on your bootstraps you can fly to the Moon..

Both parties are owned by the investor class, the Dems will never again make a serious effort to truly help the working class.

[branders seine]

14. unfortunately, your numbers for the stupid are too low.

[spanone]

15. Idiocracy....the documentary

[reggie the dog]

17. Why not just expect the Democratic

President and Congress to vote through true liberal health care reform even if it polls at 20 percent because the 25 to 25 percent who are apathetic will notice that government health insurance is far cheaper than private and that heatlh care becomes accessable. That would actually do good for the masses, the vast majority of the people.

[FiveGoodMen]

20. It would be great if they'd do that. I think it's pretty clear that they don't really want to.

[reggie the dog]

24. They are paid not to by their campaign contributions

[FiveGoodMen]

28. Yup. And as far as I can tell, the only way we can fight back it to promise

that we'll dump them in the next election.

"Oh, but the other side is worse!" screams a chorus of Dems...

Yes, but it's still the only power we have.

Keep track of those who betray us. And kick them out. (If we can)

[ashling]

26. What makes you think we have a Republic

that is so 1782
:rofl:

[bvar22]

27. If it wasn't for all those "Centrists"...

...who are pathetically grateful for whatever crumbs their Corporate Owned "representatives" let fall off the table, we could demand REAL reform comparable to what the rest of the civilized World takes for granted.

As long as Americans are willing to settle for less, that is what we will get.
How long will you continue to play a rigged carnival game pathetically hoping that next time you are going to win?

Please do the Math.



"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans. I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans, family farmers, and people who haven't felt the benefits of the economic upturn."---Paul Wellstone

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our fourth quarter 2009 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[RagAss]

39. Stop thinking of this as a Republic.... This is a Rape in progress.

[Kaleva]

41. Revoluntionary War: 1/3 for, 1/3 against, 1/3 didn't give a shit either way

[Canuckistanian]

42. I agree with those numbers

A lot of people leave out the "apathetic" numbers.

THOSE are the ones that could turn the tide. But they never do and never will in a world where REAL SUBSTANTIVE issues never get discussed.

And props for the Ben Franklin reference. I get it.