It has been a while since I last posted, but I wanted my previous post to simmer a little. Too many continuous words and words lose the ability to challenge our predisposed inclinations towards apathy.
This post will attempt to deal a little with the upcoming election from my perspective and I am imposing a critique of the process, not necessarily any one's choice in candidates, since I also have chosen to vote for a candidate.
With that said, I find that the taking of sides; either Republican or Democrat; Liberal or Conservative forms as a result of complex issues being generalized and as we attempt to sift through the muck and mire of; the debates, the policies, history, sociology, the Civil Rights Act, Southern Democrats switching to the Republican Party because of racism, tax laws, foreign policy, etc., etc...(I threw the Southern Democrat point in there specifically)
The generalizing of information which is almost impossible to process is a phenomenon of great proportion. Although I am not a psychologist, maybe some of my psychology friends could post more concerning why and how this takes place, but it is none the less, very important. Most of our communication happens non-verbally, upwards of 75%, which could also be referred to as tacit communication. Tacit communication are social norms of behavior which are unspoken, but accepted in society. Take for instance if someone walks into a coffee shop and speaks using decibel levels which would be appropriate for a football game. Although no one has stated in writing, or given informal rules about this behavior, it is simply acceptable, and a violation of these norms will result in tension. (It is kind of like going to Fuller and getting a Masters in Theology, then attempting to get a job at a Conservative Evangelical Church) ;) It could simply be the language used which triggers an associated memory in another person, in which they will then make an inference (a judgment) that this person is violating a tacit agreement. Again the result is fear or labeling, which can also sometimes result in direct violence.
This is one of the reasons that people develop opposing camps (Republican and Democrat), because it helps to structure information to better understand what one thinks. Also, the dehumanization of one group against the other further solidifies their entrenched positions, until one group can NEVER listen to the other group, because these tacit agreements become very strong. I sometimes listen to a conservative political talk show in Southern California, entitled, The Frank Pastore Show. Mr. Pastore claims to be a very Conservative Republican and vehemently opposes Barack Obama. When Mr. Pastore hears the language used by someone in which he then sub-consciously associates with a "Liberal", he will say in these exact words, "That is just the leftist propaganda that the liberals want to bring into this country." He actually hung up on a caller, because the caller started talking about property rights in relation to taxes, but property rights have been a core foundation of the wealthy and elite in this nation, and since Mr. Pastore believes wholeheartedly that the wealthy deserve everything they have, he cut the caller off.
It is amusing though that party ideologies have changed over the years. The Republican Party was the party of Lincoln and the Southern Democrats were the ones who maintained the power base of slavery in the South. After the Civil Rights Act of 1964 though, many Southern Democrats (Jesse Helms, Ronald Reagan), became Republicans. So, the ideologies of these parties has transferred power depending on the current causes. Remember, Mario Cuomo, the very liberal governor of New York is responsible for building more prisons than any state in the history of the United States of America. He continued the Prison Industrial Complex started by his Republican predecessor, Nelson Rockefeller. Rockefeller as Governor of New York was the first to criminalize the drug laws in the U.S. We as a nation started to move in the direction of rehabilitation until Nixon and Rockefeller started the "War on Drugs". The War on Drugs is almost as stupid as a War on Terror. I apologize, but as someone who locked up more drugs dealers than days I have been alive, I cringe thinking about it.
Cuomo did not move New York in a new direction, but by building more prisons; created more jobs. Well, that is the goal anyway, right? Although I myself identify closer with the liberals, I would say that the building of more prisons and Clinton starting the COPS program where he added 100,000 new police officers to the streets is the epitome of the hypocrisy of white liberalism.
Don't get me wrong, I completely believe that voting for Barack is way better than George W. Bush II, but I might be voting for Cynthia McKinney. If you have not heard her before, click on her name and listen to her grill Donald Rumsfeld. I was tickled to hear her asking questions which no one who wants to get elected could ask. If we simply choose sides, without looking further at the critique, either side will end up implementing policies which can negatively affect certain populations. Yes, even liberals can add to the gross disparity of incarceration rates in the U.S.--hopefully this point was demonstrated above. Remember also that Hitler wanted to exterminate the Jewish Marxists, since they stood against his fascist policies and he saw them as corrupting The Fatherland, Germany. If you listen to Hitler speeches, he sounds like the Republicans. (Sorry, if that is the party you support, but Palin is quoting Hitler rhetoric). She doesn't know that she is though. Maybe someone could sit down with her and point it out.
Peace!
