Friday, February 10, 2012

These states united, a miseducation.


Listening to Lauryn Hill and rummaging articles in Politico and Businessweek the following transpired.
 ...

 I hold this truth to be self-evident, that all men are not created equal, but that we by virtue of being men are endowed with certain unalienable rights and that these are but not only Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. – That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just power from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter it because it is only by the People’s consent that it stands at all, and to precise the Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to upkeep their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; but when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security!

The Second Continental Congress espoused a similar text on July 4th, 1776, a day that will live in infamy. It was on this day that the United States of America declared its independence as well as its miseducation. It was necessary I revise the most puissant phrase in American history, “…all men are created equal…” to this, “…all men are not created equal…” because it was here that the miseducation was predicated. This is self-evident. We are not equal and no amount of imagining can make men equal to one another. Some men can learn and school all their lives and never understand things as Einstein did. Some men can physically train pushing it to the limits and never run as fast as Usain Bolt or play basketball like MJ. This natural inequality cannot be usurped by any policy any government could put in place however equity is another matter entirely. Insofar as men have basic natural rights, rules and government are put in place to make sure that regardless of their inequalities men can be safe and happy while living in society – all men regardless of their natural oddities can have a far shot at life, that’s equity and that is what the government can and should provide. This would mean that a government, which exacerbates such inequalities, would be entirely contrary to the reasons it was consented. It is our duty to correct the government and offer ways to precise its rules and laws to make matters more equitable in the U.S. and if not to change this government then to simply begin the conversation that could. I do not mean to give to people things they do not deserve, only to give them a chance everyone deserves that much – the chance of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

What is it that we are fussing about today if not the inequality amongst men. Financiers steady monopolizes the wealth while the poor ever so consistently monopolize the poverty. The inequalities of life lead those fortunate to possibly become more fortunate while the unfortunate definitely become less fortunate. Free competitive choices are not equal and concentration of capital yielding some economic power remains in the hands of the few who are fortunate. The cavity is widening in a depressing economy and it is hard to tell if the government is keen on doing something about it, hell its hard to tell if they want to do anything about it in the first place. We seem to be caught in the awful habit of fueling the inequality and inequity among men and making it fine by law. Well where are the governments priorities in the matter, wasn’t the whole establishment erected to make things better for the common man, well then how can it be getting worse? What reason is there to believe that the men who run the government would be motivated to do right by the people anyhow? The agenda of the government found in its very inception has been forgotten completely so lets go back class. Lets aim for simplicity and clarity in the matter.

First thing is to talk about what the government is and that’s not walk in the park. We know its purpose for existing was primarily to manage the unequal stature of men, some common arbitrator that would keep men safe and happy. It’s an agency run by men that has power over the society. For the U.S. you have a democracy, which is a political system. Two or more parties compete for the people’s votes at some intervals for control of the governing apparatus and give up the power at the next election. Each political party is a team of men seeking office. Political parties in a democracy make policy to gain votes, serving interests groups in order to gain office. In effect the governments constituted of political parties in a democratic system act so as to maximize the number of votes it will receive and whether a government does what the people ascribe would depend upon how the competitive struggle for power influences its behavior. You can see there is not a common agenda here that dates back to the declaration at all; the agenda is one of the political parties vying for power and the interest groups that influence them. This has been a point of contention in U.S. politics since the Federalist Papers. Madison contends, “As long as the reason of man continues to be fallible, and he is at liberty to exercise it, different opinions will be formed…” Factions are inherent in mankind and liberty just like their inequalities. Factions are a catch–all term for what we might call “special interests” and pressure groups.

So go figure, the matters the government weight as important are the ones that are pertinent to not the people as a whole, not their safety and happiness, not the chance for every American to have an opportunity at a clean living but what matters is what the most effective special interest groups decide matters. It goes a little something like this: Washington is dependent on the funds from Wall Street and Wall Street is dependent on the favorable rules and regulations Congress passes, they co-exist in this manner. A web of politics and finance is spun in the process – the rich get richer and the poor get poorer in a systematized fashion at that. The interested lobbying groups work to advance the financial sector’s political objectives. So the common man stays pretty common unless he has the opportunity to become the rich man and that’s pretty hard to do but its down just not by everyone. When those common men become rich men they continue the cycle that once kept them out of the loop and voila!

But I suppose if the problem is the men we vote into these positions then it is our own fault this is happening to us as a people. But then again maybe not. The voters should be rational and vote for the political party that will govern in their favor. Each voter should weigh the utility income from government he would expect each party would provide if it were in power. The voter votes for whatever party he believes would provide him with the highest utility income. Meaning this can very well change from election to election and so can your affiliation since its based purely on what the parties running at the time can do for you, what they can and should do for your safety and happiness once again. He weighs the parties against one another and this procedure allows him to found his decision on facts rather than conjectures. But that’s supposing all the information one needs to make that decision is available. This leads to the next self-evident revelation, that there is no complete information of this kind. What may also follow and typically does is that parties do not know what the citizens want. Political parties do not run on facts because they do not need to, they run on what kind of information and how much information they can deliver to the masses to gather votes to win and to do this cost money and that money is raised to campaign thus the advent of the super political action committee. The politician takes advantage of structuring voter decision. They cannot adequately consider what would happen when one party or another wins the election. They need facts for this, and those who want the votes will persuade voters to vote for them. The goal now is to become effective in that regard. Since it takes many resources to provide information in your favor and persuade many people the men who command such resources are able to garner more than proportional political influence. No knucklehead politician is going to ignore this. So of course the President would like to change how things are but he cannot change them if he isn’t reelected now can he?

I’ll save you the rest of my political drivel but the course is set. A time is coming where we cannot cling to ideologies for safekeeping against real thinking and appraisal of the political system. It is each and all of our duties to hold the men governing accountable for our security. Relinquish your attention from the differences between the parties because that will not help in voting along your benefits as a citizen. It will only increase the inequalities between us. Not all men are created equal and soon not all men will be safe under the government’s aegis.

OFW 

No comments: