When did the truth become a rare commodity?

Americans seem angry about everything but mostly about each other. Don’t believe me? Look at their increasingly venomous postings on social networks about those horrible “other” people.  It doesn’t matter which side of the political divide people are on, they seem to take great pleasure in slagging off the other side en masse instead of actually arguing the point in question. You horrible blue! You horrible red! Only my side is right and I’m willing to post endless drivel to prove it.

Give.

Me.

A.

Break.

Time was, not so long ago, the aggressive rhetoric of the political evangelist was posted anonymously under a pseudonym on a forum where the pitch and toss would at least be controlled by moderation of sorts. Now, if the postings I see on FB and Twitter are anything to go by, people proudly post all sorts of ill thought out garbage under their own names and high five, *like*, Top Tweet, re-blog, Reddit and favourite one another while running around in their shabby clothes – rarely venturing outside their comfort zone.  More dangerous than 1D or Justin Beiber campaigns, because all sorts of nut-job conspiracies seemingly take hold of what must surely have been reasonable people. They wind each other up into a frenzy of hatred without looking at whose hands they are playing in to.

When did it become okay to run negative campaigns?

I watch TV programmes like West Wing and Newsroom and hope against hope that they represent the real America, the thoughtful, intelligent, wanting to do the right thing for the majority and not the special interest groups campaigning on Capitol Hill. But what we see are endless self-produced bilge in the form of posters, jokes and trite status updates. Really, once you told me you were a Red or a Blue and you were going to vote one way or another, I got it!  You don’t need to jam up my feed and timeline with repetitive negative comments about “the others”. Guess what, I don’t have a vote in your election  but if I did your constant stream of invective would not win me over to your cause. It’s poisonous, vinegary mind bleach which you’ve clearly all drunk.

Maybe I’m rare, but I vote based on the issues and not the figureheads promoting their answers to those issues. In America in any case, because of the money involved in campaigns, no ordinary Joe is going to get elected at national level. You’ve seen to it that only big business and lobby groups wield power by making damned sure that the little guy with his clear focus will never be elected. He’ll have to take the big bucks on offer to stay afloat and of course pay it back “some how” once elected.  Mr. Smith Goes to Washington? Don’t make me laugh. Mr Smith couldn’t even get on a tour of the Whitehouse these days.  The little guy is a  mere pawn but worryingly the little guy is more than willing to be manipulated by the elite who continue to rule as if by divine right. The little guy has become a mouthpiece for Red or Blue and all independent thought has disappeared from feeds.

When did racism and elitism become acceptable again to modern Americans?

The “birthers”, have for the past 3 and a bit years whined and whinged about the current president’s right to be elected. The drip, drip, drip effect of course is to make Joe Schmo think that there must be some “truth” to the rumour. With delusions of being  Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein they constantly gnaw away at the empty bone hoping that some meat will emerge. They then change tack to accuse the president of being a Muslim or trying to be a dictator because he wants to “socialise” medicine. What would be so shocking about having a non-Christian president?  Isn’t the State supposed to be separate from all forms of religion? didn’t the founding fathers in fact make sure that that was written into the Constitution? Didn’t Adams and Franklin want to go even further at one stage?  If Americans wanted to be a Christian country, which would be their right, wouldn’t that mean that they would want to take care of the sick and the lame? Aren’t there passages in their holy texts exhorting them to do just that? No good Samaritans for that political system if one party has anything to do with it. And the other contender – because no independent is ever going to be successful – he bumbles and stumbles around Europe and the Middle East showing an horrific lack of nus about what to say and do to appeal to the countries he might want to have on-side one day. Let’s pour oil on the flames and call Jerusalem the capital of Israel despite knowing it will wind up the Arabs in the region – because let’s face it there are more Jews going to be voting than Arabs come November. What’s a little skirmish here and there and a few hundred or thousand dead as long as you get your foot in the door of the Whitehouse so you can repay your business buddies. Let’s question the organisation of the Olympics while were out and about almost in hope that something will go tragically wrong and we can do our hand wringing piece to camera and clock up another percentage point or three in America, where it matters.

Women who are brave enough to come forward and throw their hats into the ring are unlikely to go further. America chose an untried and tested black man over a former president’s wife. The media and FBing classes vilified Pelosi and Palin and few women would subject their families to the constant scrutiny of media intrusion which is required to be elected. Not for America a Margaret Thatcher or an Indira Gandhi. There will be smart women in America who will be saying “It’s just not worth it,” while hitching their stars to another’s wagon.

When did the separation of religion and state laws get recinded?

When laws are made, they are man – and occasionally women – made.  These laws may well have been informed by religious texts but those in power are supposed to serve all the people by consensus.  There’s a dichotomy in the stance that funding for contraception and abortion should be withdrawn and yet the State will “just say no” to providing welfare to those resulting children.  There’s a recognition that marriage is a benefit which unites and protects two parties who have chosen to be together officially. If the only objections you have to these unions being allowed is because your opinion was formed by a religious text shouldn’t you stand clear and make way for someone who can form laws that protect everyone in the same way, even if you call that institution something else.

Your invidious posts  are putting me off you as a people. If you’re doing this – stop. Go vote – please! Just stop boring me to death.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19667384

Advertisements