"In the US, there's basically one party-the business party.It has two factions, called Democrats and Republicans, which are somewhat different but carry out variations on the same policies.By and large, I am opposed to those policies.As is most of the population".

^^Noam Chomsky hits the nail on the head with this.

IMO, the outlook for the US (and many other places) is bleak, and the illusion of voting providing any meaningful effect/input into the political process is disingenuous. People have their own worries pertaining directly to their day to day lives and are not daft enough to believe that voting is going to alter this; this is a lesson learnt from past experience of preceding elections.

I also find in rather perverse when political activists hector the disillusioned with trite phrases such as 'You must vote- people died for this right you have" and "If you dont vote then you have no right to complain about the outcome". Either these activists are mendacious and Machiavellian, or alternatively incredibly ignorant about the (lack of) power their favored candidate has.

The US has become confused as to what democracy is and the system they have does not in any way embody to essence of democracy as the ideal that it purports to be because those they elect have little or no power to really make the changes their electorate needs and wishes for.IMO, only the terminally ignorant will leave the voting booth having marked their cross on the ballot slip with a sense that they have upheld a democratic process.

I completely agree with you. But does that mean that voting is a total waste of time? If moderate, reasonable people don´t vote at all, then you know one thing for sure: the extremists will take total controll, because they all vote. That´s the reason why christian fundamentalists, who´re a minority in america, have so much power: they all vote.

Yes: votes are worthless, the power of the electorate is fictional. The game is rigged. America has ceased being a Republic and has become an Empire. America is ruled by secrecy. Until the secrecy ends, the United States is in its death throes. The keepers of the secrets must be put away or the nation will die. Secrecy is murdering America.

The advanced world of today is founded in the slavery of the simple world. America and Europe are a slave state. It is the slave labor of Latin America and Africans and Asians that allows us to live in material comfort.

Do you understand the cruelty of the world as it is now, with five billion people enslaved to a billion? We each own five slaves. But we never see our slaves, so we tell ourselves we need not be concerned about their health and welfare. We let them fend for themselves, locked away in their poverty and suffering. I will tell you this: when one on our children dies in the slave barrens that cover this planet, I also die, and you, my friends, even you die a little.





Wouldn't be incredible if the Vatican sold all its useless trinkets of jewels and disgusting amounts of gold and helped people with it? Rather than hording it all? Hell, the Pope would just need to sell his bejeweled scepter or a roll diamond-studded toilet paper to feed the world. A bit off topic, but I had to say it.



"They call it the American Dream because you have to be asleep to believe it." -- George Carlin

Well, this is total bullshit. In china, indonesia, and brazil, hundreds of millions of people are being lifted out of slavery because of the economic growth of these nations.

If you realy believed in any of what you say, you shouldn´t be using a computer right now.

If we're calling BS, then the same applies to your statement, imo, poly.

Economic growth is inherently unsustainable (it's predicated on infinite growth models = fail). The increasing demand for resources by developed and developing countries not only locks the populations of other countries into slavery (to say nothing of the wage-slavery in the developed/developing countries) but is also generating and perpetuating ecological crises of never-before-seen magnitudes. Capitalism is inherently oppressive and equating economic growth with freedom is fallacious.

I'm on a computer, even though I firmly believe that industrial society is killing the planet. Why, you ask? Because:

1) Compared to the corporations who engage in industrial activities, individuals aren't even a blip on the radar and even national/global populations present significantly less environmental impact than the corporations who are fetishizing consumerism and cramming their products down people's throats.

2) Because, ironically, the best tools to fight this system have been made by this system. If I want to fight this system without engaging it at all, where can I even find food, clothes and shelter, let alone the tools to fight back?

3) My disengagement with this system and the goods it creates carries no weight and creates no real change. My rebellion against this system, as made possible by the goods it creates, carries infinitely more weight and creates the spark of resistance that can be shared and emulated throughout time and space.

Remember, the founders of the US did NOT believe in Democracy



Our democracy is:

Brazil raising out of slavery? Nah... Slaves or semi-slaves in sugar cane plantations or in urban centers making clothes for big companies like Zara are often discovered these days, and the 'maids' for the riches are pretty much slaves too.

Maybe you call people in the slums buying huge plasma TVs and iphones on credit and being in debt for their lives as 'coming out of slavery' ? I call it the inverse..

"Development" doesn't have to be associated with arbitrary and lopsided 'economic' indicators. A country having a great number of 0's in one economic indicator or another does not mean its getting better (or that the inverse means its worse).

Brazil's economic boom is based on unsustainable consumption, and the distance between rich and poor is huge. It is NOT a measure of real social/developmental health.

Nobody, but in my humble opinion only one of those votes can make change for you. And I am not going to let someone else run my life. That is why I have decided to give my self a vote

Exactly. Change begins on an individual level and ripples outward in an unstoppable tidal wave.



Ploytrip said: "Well, this is total bullshit."

I ask: Would you care to give a more substantial rebuttal?

I've stayed away from this for a while because it causes me allot of grief and sorrow when I start to reflect upon what the United States has become.

Its really sad. lol.

The Government of The United States of America is the most corrupt organization ever.

President Obama is on track to spend over 1 billion dollars in his re election bid. Mr Romney is not far behind. Why would someone be willing to spend 1 billion dollars in order to get a job that pays less than 300 thousand dollars a year?

Corruption.

I find it so absolutely depressing, embarassing, disgusting..........

I am constantly hearing people say that they dont like either candidate but they are voting for the lesser of the two evils. I find this to be a really bad move.

America needs change. It takes people to make that change. People need to step up and vote there beliefs and values even if they know their choice wont be popular.

any movement takes time. I would love to share with you how I am voting.
A Green New Deal For America

I have no illusions about the Green Party winning any election in 2012. I do however see the Green Party as the only viable/sustainable option for a lasting future.

My 2 cents.

IH

LOL!

The US government should now be called a 'corpocracy'. We even had a Supreme Court ruling giving a 'voice' to corporations in the political process.

It no longer functions as a constitutional republic that it 'officially' is on the record.

Never has the USA been a 'democracy' as many times as George W Bush said that word in his lame assed speeches.

The green party was once ruling in germany.
Sorry, but nothing really changed.

http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/ What are everyone's thoughts on Gary Johnson?

Thoughts? I just voted for him. Primarily b/c he's a libertarian.

I shall be voting on the 6th for Gary Johnson,
any vote taking away from the 2 party system is a vote well used IMO

My sentiments exactly.

Hey Ice House...did you know Obama's 2008 campaign actually beat out Apple Corp to win the "Marketer of the Year" one of the (if not the) most prestigious award in the advertising industry.

Did you see they arrested Jill Stein and Cheri Honkala when they tried to get into the debate last night? Land of the free...

As to Gary Johnson...my thoughts on American Libertarianism are that it's a recipe for disaster. In the US, Libertarianism is essentially corporate tyranny, or domination at the hands of unaccountable instutions. With no regulation, the environmental degradation we've been witnessing will only accelerate at an unprecedented rate, working conditions will plummet, income disparity will skyrocket and no one will be held accountable (not that they really are under the current system, but it can, and will, get worse).

Libertarianism in the sense that Americans use it (contrasted with the European usage, which is pretty much the opposite) hints at a non-state-subsidized capitalism. There is nowhere in the developed world that currently engages in such a format. In fact, the most cogent examples can be found in the so-called "third world" and are, in large part, the reason the "third world" looks as it does.

I understand the desire to end government interference in our lives, but I would humbly suggest that if you're interested in ending the State (or hamstringing it beyond function), you must also put an end to Capital or face extreme tyranny.

Suffice it to say, the US system of government must change to serve its citizens free of the influence of the corporate world rather than the citizens serving a government interlocked with corporations.

Folks complain about horrible politicians and policies, but it seems that a large part of the population isn't interested in facts or history. They prefer rhetoric and theater. This applies to both sides of the aisle.

I've come to understand (after some discussion with some very wise friends) that political parties are not built from the top down, but from the ground up. For me that means voting for viable third party candidates and progressive human-centered policies in my local and state elections.

Until some kind of critical mass is attained by parties other that big 2, third party presidential candidates are an almost silent statement at best, and a possible vote for the greater of two evils (depending on your outlook and which candidate is favored) at worst.

It seems like the green party in my area is only visible at presidential election time. I'd like to change this, so I'm looking into how I can help it be a real presence year round. How we can get candidates outside of the system - into the system to compete with what we know we're not fond of.

The green party represents MY hopes for government well. For others it may be some other party. That's not important. What's important is that as citizens, we own up to our responsibilities as voters (in a free-ish society - and I'm using this term as loosely as I can) to understand issues and platforms and to help organize and promote institutions that aim to help ALL PEOPLE rather than corporations or greedy plutocrats.

I feel a lot of our problems start with voter apathy. Apathy towards voting and apathy towards knowing the system in which they exist.

I know that's over simplified. Many, many things play into it, but I think the first step is giving a shit about being educated and about the system that no-one can escape.

For President, I'll vote based on human suffering. I'll vote for the candidate that I believe will cause the least. That's the best I can do with the options presented.

Ran across this quote today and really felt it fit the current political mood.

"Not everybody is comfortable with the idea that politics is a guilty addiction. But it is. They are addicts, and they are guilty and they do lie and cheat and steal — like all junkies. And when they get in a frenzy, they will sacrifice anything and anybody to feed their cruel and stupid habit, and there is no cure for it. That is addictive thinking. That is politics."
— Dr. Hunter S. Thompson

Peace and love to you all

how do you figure?

libertarianism is what democracy actually should be.
preservation of civil liberties, without corporate or state interference.

American libertarianism is the removal of State power without doing anything to address corporate power, private property, class hierarchy or capitalism (it's no surprise that the Koch-funded Tea Party is one of the largest mouthpieces for current American libertarian ideology). The most powerful entities in an American libertarian model will be corporations, and the corporate power structure is inherently tyrannical.

European libertarianism or "libertarian socialism" is quite the opposite, presenting 'a non-hierarchical, non-bureaucratic society without private property in the means of production'. So, yes, I agree with your statement that libertarianism is what democracy should be, just not libertarianism as practiced and generally defined/applied in the US.