The 2012 Elections As A Tipping Point And The Fallacy Of Voting For The Lesser Of Two Evils

Honestly, I don’t really care who wins the 2012 presidential election.  There is no way either major party candidate can actually stop the future.  Nor can they embrace it without creating their own demise.  There was a time for action but it has passed.  It just doesn’t matter anymore.

Back in 2009 soon after Obama took office and showed this true definition of change – corporatism, cronyism, secrecy, the expansion of wars and running interference for Wall Street criminal investigations – I said that I thought it was highly likely a third party would rise in 2012.  There are four third parties challenging the status quo; the Constitution, Libertarian, Green and Justice Parties.  And, they had their own debate a few weeks ago.  While that hasn’t translated into victory, I’m not familiar with any such dynamic ever happening in our history.  And, as noted in the last election, the largest political party in our nation, by a wide margin, is now the independent voter.  

I most definitely think our nation’s cumulative mindset has reached a tipping point regardless of how this presidential election turns out.  I view Proposition 37 in California to be a far more important proxy of that tipping point.  Because it tells me when faced with a choice of corporate rule or self-rule in an issue that involves daily decision-making, food, is the nation ready to take responsibility.   In other words, embrace democracy or personal responsibility.  We shall see.

I don’t have a prediction for who will become president.  I have no method of determining any such outcome that gives me some type of advantage.  But, I will go out on a limb and say that I believe it is quite possible that this president will be elected with the approval of less than 20% of the voting population.   Less than one in five Americans voting for the winning presidential candidate would most certainly mean a tipping point has most certainly passed us. 

So, with the most recent BLS data, 20% of the popular vote would be less than 48 million people.   Of course, let’s be frank.  Neither political party wants every American to vote.  Voter suppression in both parties is as American as apple pie.  The Republicans don’t want all of those people they have thrown under the bus to come to the polls.  And, the democrats don’t all of those voters showing up that they endlessly lie to with empty promises.  If one person-one vote democracy was really an intent under a system controlled by political parties, money couldn’t buy a politician, we would have a national voting day where everyone had the day off, we would have a system that truly educates people on issues rather than one of demagogy and lies, we would provide free public transportation to those unable to get to the polls themselves and numerous other incentives for people to vote.  The smaller the turnout, the more the status quo benefits in a system of looting, pillaging, exploitation and corruption.   Or so their perception goes.  Of course, the flip side of this  perception is that waning participation will eventually lead to political collapse.   That people’s belief systems are being rebuilt around a world that excludes the current system of control. 

I want to close with this dilemma that both political parties pose to voters regarding the vote for a third party candidate.  That unless you vote for a Democrat or Republican, your vote is wasted.  This false paradox is how they keep people enslaved in a system of massive corruption and the subversion of democracy.  This is how they keep you enslaved in a hell that they create.  It is why we have systemic poverty in this nation while a class of looters prey upon the most vulnerable and pillage our country.  I want to use an allegory or example to make a point.  This isn’t a religious example and you don’t need to be religious or of a belief system that includes heaven and hell.  It’s just one that fits nicely and is understandable by everyone -- 

Let's say you lived in hell and you had three choices to vote for who was going to run hell;  the devil, the devil's son or God.  You know God is never going to win the election because you are in hell and there is no support for truth, honesty or justice.  So, you limit your choices to the devil and his son.  ie, Determining which of those two candidates are the lesser of two evils and will win your vote.  You know that voting for God will mean your candidate will not win or as the Democrats and Republicans tell us, your vote will be wasted.   Voting for any evil means your mind is embracing dissonance in this decision because your belief system is at odds with truth and you are rationalizing.  Rationalizing is a trademark of the self and its rigid, control-based belief system.  The German people rationalized their support for Hitler.  Obama rationalizes the use of drone murders in an unconstitutional use of force involving enormous collateral murders of innocent people including women and children. 

But, there is a truth here.  That truth is.........  If you want to change the world, first you have to change yourself.  You have to relinquish control of that rigidly constructed perception of self and its illusory belief system.   You have to bring reality into your conscious mind and accept a new belief system that marries with reality.  In doing so, you have to stand up and be held to account by taking personal responsibility for embracing justice, honesty and truth within yourself and resist rationalizing a support for evil.  And, doing so means taking a stand for principles of justice, honesty and truth even if you won't directly create the outcome in life you wish.  Or, even if the outcome may harm you.  Isn’t this what many religions teach?  An acceptance of a higher good in lieu of rationalizations?  And denial of that higher good by embracing evil, be in the lesser of two evils or not, will not lead to salvation or truth?  The alternative of voting for a perceived lesser of two evils is, in fact, still embracing evil.  

Alternatively, voting for God, even if he has no chance of winning an election in hell, is a vote for justice, honesty and truth.  Your mind is free of the guilt, shame and depression that eventually comes by making rationalizations rather than embracing truth.   And, no matter what anyone ever says, you know a greater truth.  That you did what was right.  You stood to account and no one can ever take that away from you.  That you supported righteousness.  That you supported goodness, kindness, human dignity and most importantly, the universal force of love and emotional freedom over fear, hatred and evil. 

This election is really quite simple.  Will you vote for evil or the lesser of two evils or will you vote for justice, honesty and truth with a clear conscience?  Will you embrace the heaven of emotional freedom over the hell of rationalizations?  Even if doing so may not be in your self-interest.  Are you able to see beyond the self and embrace a greater good?  Or will you be just like all of those people on Wall Street who you will now be hypocritically criticizing for rationalizing their own behavior because it was convenient.  Because it benefited the self and all of its rationalizations?  Is supporting the lesser of two evils in any election really any different than the behavior of Wall Street?  Or Germans who rationalized their support of Hitler?  Or any of the other countless rationalizations of the self?   It’s difficult for all of us to take responsibility for our behavior.  It’s difficult to embrace emotional freedom over rationalizations.  Oftentimes it seems nearly impossible.  Especially when it may mean that we become separated from untruthful social values that define so much of who we believe we are.  And, it becomes ever more difficult with every new rationalization we make. 

Just remember, rationalizing and dissonance are why we are in hell in the first place.  How do we ever expect to get out of hell unless we end the rationalizing?  Have we learned nothing?