The Great Global Con-Trick

How long can democracy survive in the present world climate? Is the fusing of political parties really a positive move, of lasting benefit to those nations classified as ‘democratic’?

Today, it was announced that Jon Huntsman, the Republican governor of Utah, would be US President Obama’s new Ambassador to China. He is just another of a number of Republicans who find themselves now serving in the Obama administration.

Initially, it could be argued that politicians working together for a common purpose is a good thing. After all, the way to get things done is surely to cooperate? That’s fine, so long as the common goals are advantageous to all, and not just to those who control the politicians.

In practice, it’s not fine at all. Democratic political systems operate on the premise of two or more parties vying for the affections of the electorate. In that situation, the electorate has a large measure of control. Each party knows its time in office is limited by its ability to satisfy the electorate. Failure to do so undoubtedly results in a demise from power.

While extremists on the left or right can hold sway for short periods of time, the more moderate centrists from both left and right control the bulk of the powerbase in any political party. When moderates join forces, which can occur when a left-leaning party moves to the right, as happened to the Labour Party under Tony Blair in 1990’s Britain, the result is an electorate bereft of choice when contemplating party manifestos.

In reality, the voter is left with no choice because each political party offers similar policies. In the case of the British example, those policies are advantageous only to the politician’s corporate masters. The electorate has lost control. It matters not to the corporate overlords whether a Labour or Tory government is in office; both are servile to corporate demands, paying only lip service to those who voted them into office.

President Obama’s campaign promise to work with both parties in solving the nation’s ills may seem a good idea until the underlying consequences are examined in detail. By drawing the moderate Republican centrists into his camp he is, to all intents and purposes, isolating the extremists on both sides and creating a new Democrat/Republican coalition. Given Obama’s track record since his inauguration, any suggestion that this new centrist ‘party’ is working for the people must surely be considered ludicrous.

Under the guise of ‘repairing the economy’, he has lorded over the biggest transfer in history of monetary power from the people to the corporate powerbase. The American people are now up to their eyebrows in the greatest fiscal debt ever, while the corporates are overflowing with wealth courtesy of the US taxpayer.

Let’s not assume this is a temporary political aberration. The world is changing. Globalization is now reality, and the corporations are in control.

Democracy is destined to become no more than a joke to chuckle over, while sipping Napoleon brandy in the Aniline armchairs of exclusive executive clubs from Washington to Bruges.

Once upon a time, politicians ran nations on behalf of the people. It wasn’t a perfect system; the pendulum tended to swing from one extreme to the other, but ultimately the people maintained control of their destiny.

Today, that may still appear to be true, but behind the scenes a slow and insidious change is taking place. Politicians have altered their allegiance. No longer are the people their masters. Corporate control reigns, and the only function of the people is to ensure the continued viability of the corporations.

While actively publicizing their supposed aim to spread freedom and democracy around the globe, the politicians are working to achieve a global system that has little to do with either.

Democracy is being systematically slaughtered.

Filed under:

6 Replies to “The Great Global Con-Trick”

  1. I can see that what you’re saying may be absolutely right. Yet, with regard to President Obama – what was our alternative?

    There was a candidate called Dennis Kucinich in the primaries of 2008 who was putting forward all the things the far left liberals now say they wanted. Yet who supported him? I did. Hardly anybody else did, so I shifted to Clinton, then to Obama.

    I think the Prez is doing the best he can in shitty circumstances.

    So what now?

    I wonder what would have happened if a lot of people had supported Kucinich, and he managed to get the presidency with a slim majority. Would he have been able to do the stuff he wanted to do. No, of course not.

    Let’s not keep knocking Obama. Let’s try to be a bit positive. Negativity breeds negativity. Let’s at the very least feel glad for what we’ve got, and that what we’ve got isn’t McCain and…..Palin!!!

  2. RJA:
    The corporatocracy has never been more flagrantly evident as it is today, even to the blurring of the party lines.
    To see Obama, who had given even my cynical old heart a lift, adopt the BushMasterPlan with buttons down the middle has seen the last of my ‘hope’ go down the drain.
    As the transfer of wealth continues, welcome to the Plan, long written, for the New American Global Empire.
    Obama is a puppet on a string.
    XO
    WWW

  3. RJ, a very good post….

    Sadly I totally agree with you and www

    Elections are a sham because, how can we have true democracy when both parties are saying the same thing and we need to choice between the two… it’s almost comical!

  4. I could have written this myself. Totally agree with you. At present the UK is facing local and euro elections soon in which extreme parties are expected to gain their first foothold in democracy – because a centrist non-choice elite has destroyed the very idea of choice in democracy.
    My own favoured solution is the independent politician, free of party loyalty, and whittling away at the party system, with politicians who think for themselves and don’t follow an increasingly merging party line.
    This would kickstart real opposing debates and we may be back on track. How to get those independents, though – that’s the problem.

  5. Twilight – at first glance it may seem you are out on a limb with regard to other commentators. I don’t believe this is so. I agree Obama was the best on offer. I’m still prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt as, like you, I think it likely he is “….doing the best he can in shitty circumstances.”
    He has to tread a wary path or he may well end up suffering a similar fate to JFK, who was undoubtedly killed for going against the Mafia. Today, the corporates are the Mafia.
    No, I don’t believe Kucinich would have fared better had he won the presidency. Frankly, if Jesus Christ were to become US president they’d end up crucifying him on Capitol Hill.

    WWW – Obama may well be tugging at those strings behind the scenes, but God help him if he breaks them.

    Nevin – almost comical, were not our lives, and those of our children, on the line.

    Anthony North – I tend to agree with you regarding independent politicians. Party whips have always been a crazy idea. While the system works so well for those who benefit from it the most, any change at all will prove mightily difficult to achieve.

  6. A recent print edition of The Mail carried a pretty small piece by a regular columnist, whose name I have now forgotten, saying that “Obaba is hust following orders.” The piece went on to say that the orders were those of the Military Industrial Complex. They further said (paraphrased) that if he didn’t, his fate would be … unthinkable.

    And here’s something I’m saying all on my own. Anyone who can’t bring themselves to believe this to be true, should ask Colin Powell.

Comments are closed.