General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumsimo Glenn Beck is a sociopath, but he's right about voters being PAWNS
Voters on the right and on the left are pawns in "their game" - corporations and oligarchs - and will continue to be pawns until we have effective public financing laws, as well as public funding for at least one news source that operates within "Fairness Doctrine" principles.
Divide-and-conquer tactics keep the charade of U.S. democracy going - and the only thing I see on the horizon among Dems that might change this is a run by Bernie Sanders and/or Elizabeth Warren, who seem to have both the nerve and the vision to take on the status quo.
Ultimately, there is no way to stop being pawns except to stop - and that means the people have to unite.
Just something I've been thinking about. What are your thoughts?
Ref. re Beck's claim:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5150244
merrily
(45,251 posts)saying it for the wrong reasons.
We are pawns; and the game is probably bigger than we will ever know. Still, our options are somewhat limited.
polichick
(37,152 posts)He stokes fear and paranoia for profit, and has been an active participant in the divide-and-conquer game.
I think you're right about how big the game might be - Eisenhower warned us long ago and it has grown much broader and deeper since Reagan. Still, isn't it high time for voters on both sides to stop being pawns?
Democrats are convinced the sky will fall if they vote third party--and that is a risk-- and, since the Tea Party started, Republicans are saying the same thing: Vote the lesser of two evils.
They should chip in on a single campaign: "Vote for us, no matter how unhappy you are with us. After all, we're not them."
Democrat pundits and strategists say the same thing over and over: The left has nowhere else to go.
And we don't have Koch money to start a party within a party. And, as I said, helping buid, donating to, working for and voting a third party (misnomer) is a risk Democrats don't willing to take. And most of America is woefully underinformed.
They have no clue that the Democrats changed so dramatically. (Or maybe they didn't change as much as lose their fear of an uprising, especially now that Homeland Security and local cameras and mikes paid for with HS money are everywhere, as is the NSA.
Koko and I were discussing this on another thread. Maybe I can find it and edit this post to include the link.
I like "Act locally, though."
polichick
(37,152 posts)awakening Republicans to change the conversation from just a discussion about inequality to a broader discussion about how we got here - and how only uniting the people can change it.
Warren being a Republican for many years might make her acceptable to some on the right, and Sanders already appeals to indies.
Va Lefty
(6,252 posts)polichick
(37,152 posts)Carlin brilliantly described our situation and hinted at the answer - a population of critical thinkers.
Not a lot of those on the right, but imo it will take a coalition like we've never seen to make this country a true democracy.
CJCRANE
(18,184 posts)and probably spent less money than Beck and his tea party billionaire buddies.