First, I want to thank whomever you are who donated a star to my name. I appreciate it very much. If you care to reveal yourself and get kudos (or disdain; I'm an 'acquired taste'. ) from the board, please do. If you prefer to remain anonymous, know my thanks are not lessened because I do not know who you are. You did a nice thing for me.
Now, because I'm old school and I'm still always aware of
'signal to noise ratio', I have to include something with this OP to make it 'worth' standing as an OP rather than just a 'look at me! I got a star!' kind of thing.
One thing you should know before reading any further: I am good at politics; successful, even. I could be great at politics and horrifically successful, if only I'd sell out. This is the internet; I cannot prove the previous statement even if I were to provide links and names and so forth you'd still never be sure I was who I say I am.
I could tell you the name of the book in which I'm quoted. I could tell you the name of the political observer/pundit/critic who listed me as one of the new 'influential women in politics' in my state. I could tell you my name and my previous titles and how I succeeded (and got 'punked') in my political career. I could tell you about the successful issues campaigns we ran and how they provided diversion for even more populist legislation to get passed. I could tell you about the times I got 'punked' and the lessons learned. I could tell you about the media coverage I received as the 'go to' person on all things women's rights, in my state. Well, I could.
Unless I'm ready to fully come out as myself, and even then, I have no proof unless you come visit and even then...
Knowing that, take the following information and advice as you see fit.
You will be happier with your political involvement if 'you':
-understand that politics is; a) war b) war over who has
power over others; 'you' and I would be the 'others'.
-read Sun Tzu, "The Art of War", and Niccolò Machiavelli, "The Prince", and Harriet Rubin, "The Princessa : Machiavelli for Women" and "The Classics". You know that two-tiered educational system we have in which the private schools and Ivy League Universities cater to the upper classes? Those lessons are not taught in public schools or to the lower 98%. Learn their rules or lose.
-advocate for a candidate or issue
based solely on policy. The minute you advocate based on the 'personality' of the candidate or the 'leader' of said issue, you have set yourself up for 'buyer's remorse.' People are human; seems a silly statement, yes? If you support a 'personality' regardless of their policy, they're bound to disappoint. Every hero has his/her feet of clay or Achille's heel. There are no
living, perfect humans.
-understand that voting records are not what they appear. There are many places on the web that purport to report a polician's voting record. They do not. In order to track a voting record, you have to know whip counts, on which vote the site reports, the trend of the politician's voting, how it
appears when compared to 'the party' (regardless of party), the negotiations behind the scenes (you better have been sitting in on them), with whom and for what they negotiated, and so on, and so forth. In other words, if "you're" not part of that politician's 'inner circle,' 'you' have very limited information as to why they voted the way they did.
-understand a politician's inner circle consists of; campaign manager, communications manager, policy spokesperson/adviser (sometimes). If 'you' weren't any of those, 'you' don't know what actually happened, was discussed, was decided, was negotiated. Side note: politician's spouse is rarely part of the inner circle unless said spouse occupied one of those roles.
-debate policy rather than 'personality.' The debates are whether or not {insert politician's name} has a history of supporting those policies which are important to 'you.' Go make a list and prioritize it. Start there. Spend months investigating; I kid 'you' not, it takes that long unless 'you' are experienced enough to see an obvious clue to their true value system.
-remember this JFK quote: "Mothers all want their sons to grow up to be President, but they don't want them to become politicians in the process." {I learned this quote from a DUer. I've forgotten your name but that does not diminish my gratitude to you for your sharing of it.}
-understand that, all we have left are politicians. See the quote above. This is a result of our current confluence of systems of control and suppression. If "you've" not yet learned that, go work a successful campaign; up close and personal. That is, 'your' candidate got elected and then elected again and then elected once more. How close are they "now" to where they started out?
-are still of a mind that the systems can be fixed, read the above first or "you'll" be so demoralized "you'll" never get out of bed, much less vote again.
-must remain engaged and willing to vote if 'you' still believe voting makes a difference.
-must get over 'your' current instance of "buyer's remorse." See all previous statements.
If "you're" experiencing "buyer's remorse,"; get over it and move on or stay out of politics. Yes, that's harsh. It's also very true. If "you're" still naive and gullible, 'you' hinder rather than help. Flinging around "your" remorse gives chum to the right-wing. "You're" hurting what 'you' think "you're" helping.
If a right-wing talking point happens to fit 'your' personal prejudice and 'you' think "you'll" start to use it as criticism of a/the leftist party; "you've" gone beyond criticism to 'aiding and abetting' the enemy. If 'you' don't think the right wing is 'your' enemy, read my first bullet-point above. If 'you' don't know which are right wing talking points,
silence is a political virtue.
Some right wing talking points:
-sneeringly refer to political correctness: that's how they define their bigotry/prejudice as acceptable.
-latte liberals
-limousine liberals
-angry liberals
-Democrats are liberal
-sneeringly refer to liberals
-liberals=socialists, communists, pinko, fascists, 'pussies,' 'wusses,' feminized, feminazis; pretty much anything that doesn't meet the standards of 'conventional wisdom'
-welfare queens
-matriarchy (see above about 'conventional wisdom')
-peaceniks
-hippies
-pot heads
-druggies
-anything that presents the left in opposition, and
wrongly so, of the status quo
Add your own if you care to.
Again, Thank You! to my benefactor.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
