Right to Choose
By definition democracy is the government of the people, by the people, for the people. But in broader sence, it about every citizens right to choose, whatever he or she wants to choose. Democracy evolved as a reaction to the dominant idea of God’s right to dictate everything in a person’s and the collective life of communities, neighborhoods, cities, states and countries. People gradually realized , and this realization became widespread and stronger with passage of time, that the organized religion is just another business and is being brutally used to preserve the status quo of privileged classes and to suppress the masses. So, people generally, and leading intellectuals specially, said that we should be free to choose our destiny and our priorities in our lives, rather than being dictated by priests, aristocrats and beaurucrates.
Plato said, democracy is an impractical idea and is only possible in kingdom of Gods. So far, history has proven him right. This is because the rich, the powerful and the famous have been tremendously successful in finding their way around, and are allowed to hinder and adversely effect people\s choices in their favor. As per Nietzsche, the world is still being ruled by 2% minority of intelligentsia. These people keep taking unfair advantage of their higher intelligence and immense resources acquired, based on this intelligence.
Take the example of political systems. Most political systems are dominated by few, and in worst case scenario, like United States, two political parties. These political parties build a monopoly on political system, which is supposed to be owned by citizens. In most cases, their origin and existence depends on their rich, powerful and popular sponsors like corporations, theocracy and beaurucracy. No one can rise to the top of these parties without the approval from their rich, powerful and famous patrons.
Consider the process of nomination for elections. If you have a full-time job, where you have to clock in on an exact time and for a pre-set period of time, you can’t even think about participating in it. In this way, how many of us are automatically kicked out of the process? Say you managed to find an alternative source of making living. Now, you still need an enormous amount of time and money devoted to it. For this you need donations and sponsorships that are competitive with other candidates for that nomination. Otherwise you simply cannot survive in this race. God forbid me, these sponsorships do not come without strings attached. These rich, powerful and famous sponsors do an extensive check of your background and track record, not to find out, if you are a sincere public servant, but to find out if you have been, are and will be beneficial to their interests.
This is where an honest and sincere person faces a tough choice. If you turn to be not beneficial to status quo, bye-bye to your political career, and if you turn out to beneficial for them, then bye-bye to the sincere and honest representation of your voters.
Suppose you made it to get the nomination from your party. Now you need even more money and resources to run election campaign. You must enroll, even richer, more powerful and more famous people. They all come with a price. How much compromise you can make with them? More compromising you are (in their term more smart you are), more money and influence flows into your campaign and more are the chances of winning. There is only one problem. All these compromises, steer you away from the interests and representation of your actual voters! But who cares? As long as you can win. Winning is everything and this society hates losers, regardless of why and how you won or lost. No wonder most of these winners and public representatives do not keep their promises and turn out to be corporate pimps any way.
Take the example of media. An independent internet based news and information company, conducted a random survey on Times Square, News York visitors and asked questions about Federal Reserve and later published the video of that survey on YouTube.com. Surprisingly, almost none of them knew that Federal Reserve is a private banking cartel. Thus, none of them realized that U.S, currency is issued by this cartel of private banks and not by U.S. government. This money is ten loaned to federal government and an interest is paid by federal government to Federal Reserve on this “loan”. Since money is issued only in the amount of loan and the interest on it is not covered by amount of money issued, government has to get another loan from the cartel of private banks known as Fed to pay the interest on previous loans. Hence, our government is trapped in a perpetual cycle of borrowing money from Fed and paying interest on it with another loan. The only way other way for the government to pay this perpetual cycle of loans and interest is by unconstitutional collection, and I repeat unconstitutional collection, of income tax by Internal Revenue Services, commonly known by the abbreviation of its name, IRS. Yes, constitutionally IRS is authorized to collect only indirect taxes and has no constitutional authority to collect income tax. Collection of income tax by IRS is unconstitutional and hence illegal. That is why and how, expensive taxation lawyers get big tax breaks for their rich corporate and individual clients. These dishonest and sneaky lawyers keep this secret of their success, secret and never tell us that they win cases based on the fact that collection of income tax by IRS is unconstitutional.
Same is the case with extension of credit. Banks, insurance companies and other financial companies are required to keep and have only a small proportion of credit and other financial services provided by them, as a collateral, in the form of assets and reserves. The most of the trillions of dollars of credit and other financial services is generated by your (consumer or credited) signatures and financial strength. So, you own the credit granted to you. But guess who charges heavy interest, some times over 30%, based on risk involved in these transactions? Of course banks. Who is the real risk taker in this case? You, the credited or consumer. If bank goes bankrupt due to these risky and heavily out of proportion crediting and financing, who picks up the tab? Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, FDIC, a corporation owned by tax payers and mostly funded by tax payers like you and me. since the fees charged by member financial institutions is nominal and grossly insufficient. Poor banks!!!!!! How much burden they can take? So, our corporate pimps, commonly known as members of congress, put this burden on “rich” tax payers like you and me!!!!! If the loss is not covered by FDIC insurance than tax payer’s money is always available for ‘bailouts’ and ‘rescues’. Thanks to corporate media and Congress, it is never hard to convince victims (citizens) that sky is falling, if they do not empty their pockets for the rescue of rich and wealthy and this bailout or rescue is not done.
This is the quality of information provided by main stream media. We are never informed with these bitter facts. At the top of it, I frequently hear “I don’t watch news. It is too depressing”. What these people actually mean is that they don’t watch, listen or read news. This is the situation in world’s flag bearer of democracy, the very existence of which depends upon well-informed voters. These people are easy prey for opportunist politicians and sneaky corporate propagandists. Their opinions are usually based on rumours generated by a piece of news being repeatedly broadcasted by a corporate owned TV channel. Guess what is their usual opinion. Almost exactly as portrayed by that news channel. Our election campaigns usually run on what he said, what she said, instead of who he or she is and what he or she believes in, what is his or her track record, what he or she wants to do or likely to do and who are the people around him or her, running the campaigns and providing the money and other essential resources.
A little slip of tongue or inadvertent act, contrary to the track record of person, can be made huge deal by profit and ratings hungry media. Usually, media declares the front-runner or runners even before the race starts. This is their way of announcing, who is their favorite and who is going to get coverage. Other candidates are totally or almost totally blacked out by presumably neutral media. Even when other candidates are reported, it is usually something negative or extremely thrilling and selling from business point of view. Other candidates are always reported as out of main stream and not wanted, not favored, not as smart. Big media companies are supposed to be neutral but they frequently endorse a candidate in all important races, mostly depending upon editors’ choice, employed by these big media companies. These companies go as far as, if their favorite and endorsed person does not win, they do not get tired of telling people, how bad that decision was and how this person is failing and will fail, even if this failure is against the vital interests of country and nation. All this is done when, in accordance to journalism’s basic principle, all journalists are supposed to be impartial in reporting. Many of them try to hide behind the claim that they are critiques and analysts not the journalists, but the problem is that most of them are hired as journalists and do not inform their viewers, listeners and readers with the fact that they are not impartial.
So, where is the choice? I guess lost somewhere in this mambo jumbo and the game of powerful interests?
In most secular democracies, the choice is still being limited on other claims like, right and wrong, good and bad, acceptable and unacceptable, pious or sinful, religious or non religious. The common examples of this are equal rights regardless of race. color, ethnicity, sex or sexual orientation. Field is still unequal for you if you are not in majority based on any of these criteria. Discrimination is still widespread and deep in most societies. Violations are frequently overlooked and laws are not effectively implemented. Results are wide and deep differences between different groups of population and the people are frequently made to believe on stupid and ridiculous ideas like, this is because that particular group / groups are criminal and /or violent and / or stupid and /or lazy and / or ignorant, as opposed to because of in equal opportunities and discrimination and suppression of ages. Women are still getting paid less than men and homosexuals are still not allowed to marry in most cases. Minorities still do not have a fair share in higher education and higher paid and more powerful jobs. If you had a real choice, would you choose to be left behind? Sadly, many people are still made to believe that minorities and different people are being left behind by their own choices. They believe that regardless of circumstances, some people are just losers and they will always chose the same path, doesn’t matter what? In accordance with them, we are not the product of environment. Winners are borne winners and losers are borne losers. May I ask, then what is the need for a family and /or schools or institutions like that in our societies? At the same time these people would not get tired of complaining about, how weakening families and disintegrating education system is causing chaos in our society. How can you accept and deny the importance of social environment and the institutions responsible for it, at the same time? It can only be one way or the other. Not the both ways! Isn’t that stupid or what?
Hence, it is critically important to restore and firmly establish the peoples right to choose. Otherwise, we will always remain divided and unstable. After all only way to accept a different person and different idea is to accept that people are different, like it or not! Even in marriage and friendship we choose to be close to a person / persons who are not exactly like us. We gradually learn to enjoy similarities and compromise with differences. Same is the case with workplace and business relationships. As a matter of fact the strength and durability of every relationship and institution depends upon this understanding and compromise, regardless of what sneaky politicians, corporate media or biased priests are telling us. Together we can definitely build this colorful and beautiful rainbow of different colors and perspectives.