The System won’t change by waiting until after the next election

Joyce L. Arnold, Liberally Independent, Queer Talk, equality activist, writer.

All the arguing, sniping and even actual, respectful conversation about the big problems with our Two Partying System are not something new and unheard of. Well, “unheard of” does sort of fit, because the years, decades in fact, of analysis and conversations went largely “unheard.” The timing changes the conversation, of course – the specific Electeds, the current big issues, etc., naturally play a significant role. But the basic “we have a problem with our two party political / electoral process and system” … that’s not new.

What is new is that it’s now being heard more often, though even that isn’t unique to the moment. It comes periodically. And because it does, there are those who quickly say “I’ve heard it before” and dismiss it all as a “been there, done that” kind of thing.

But when the fundamental reasons for the ‘that,’ the actions taken, still exist, then obviously the problem remains. Since the Two Party Front for the Oligarchy structure continues to rule, it’s not exactly shocking that people who find it problematic keep pointing out the same concerns. That doesn’t make them less problematic. Rather, it points to the entrenched and well-funded nature of the problems. And for me, and many others, it brought us to the point of deciding the system isn’t “out of order” but “planned to order.” It’s designed to produce the results it does: one of two options, with enough “differences” to make sure voters can be played against each other, but ultimately, the Chief Elected knows who paid to get him (someday it will be “her”) in the Oval Office, as do the Congress Electeds.

Taylor has written about her “recovering partisan” journey, both in her posts here, and in her book, The Hillary Effect. Among other things, it’s a journey with which I think many can identify in some ways, and very possibly, many more will come to do so. It’s also, no doubt, a journey many will reject and condemn. Nothing new there, either, as I’m sure Taylor can attest.

But here’s the thing: the move, or in Taylor’s terms, the “recovery,” is about a process. It’s not, as some like to say, a matter of “ideology.” That’s a simplistic, and meant to be pejorative, label. I’ve had it applied to myself for a lot of years now, usually in some combination of “radical, liberal, activist, lesbian, feminist, socialist, un-American, un-Christian” terms. I probably forgot some, but you get the picture.

Now, as I also keep saying, I think there’s good and needed work to be done from within the Two Party system. And to a certain extent, there’s really no way to avoid doing some of that. For those who choose that “internal” path of change / reform, more power to you. I sincerely appreciate the efforts.

But for those who reach the point of “enough,” almost certainly after a long and trying process, we find ourselves in lots of good company, too.

For me, years ago, it was largely because of my “radical liberal lesbian activist” experiences – equality is rather radical, actually – that I finally came to the “enough” point. Being told, over and over, by Democratic Wannabe’s and Electeds, some version of: “I’d like to support you, but understand that ‘your issues’ are much too controversial for me to take on at this point. After this next election, maybe. Besides, the other party is much worse. So, thanks for dropping by. Be sure and donate, volunteer and vote for me. Then it would be best if you’d stay kind of quiet, because all that ‘lesbian, gay, bisexual, and my god even transgender’ talk is unsettling. You did know, right, that some of my best friends are gay? Okay, take care now, and God bless America!”

All that in mind, here’s something I came across that’s perhaps a bit sad, but it’s also encouraging. Check out Two-Party Tyranny, by Ben Petit. An excerpt:

Having reached the legal voting age, I will be eligible to vote in this year’s presidential election for the first time in my life. After ages of watching debates and giving my two cents on the issues to anyone who would listen, my years as a politically savvy adolescent have led up to the chance to contribute directly to the democratic process. Indeed, it should be an exciting occasion, but my enthusiasm is dampened by the knowledge that as long as America is caught in a cycle of two-party tyranny, my vote is essentially meaningless.

Every election cycle, voters are sent a clear message from the two major parties that if their views don’t fit into neat little ‘liberal’ or ‘conservative’ boxes, they aren’t worthy of representation. If you’re not one of us, they’re told, you’re nobody.
Were it merely a product of popular opinion, the two party system wouldn’t really be worth complaining about, but the fact is that the only reason the two parties consistently win is that they make the rules. …

Think of the potential, the talent and the leadership that we’re shutting out by putting up a ‘do not enter’ sign to anyone who doesn’t fit into a two-party pigeonhole.

And this excerpt, from Bruce Dixon, at Black Agenda Report, “How To Waste Your Vote In 2012”:

If we want our votes to have any meaning, it’s time to reject the fake choices between the two corporate parties. It’s time to wise up, to grow up and like adults, to take a view longer than dessert, or the next two or three elections.

The System won’t change by waiting until after the next election.

( Photo via ThinkProgress )

Share