American Politics and the Lesser of Two Evils

More often than not, there is an option that is overlooked. Sometimes time is of the essence and a quick decision must be made. Sometimes less plausible or less viable alternatives are instinctively ignored. Sometimes the process of critical thinking simply has not run its course. For whatever reason, though, the number of options is often reduced further than it should be.

This is especially true of American politics. Here in the bastion of Western democracy, the plutocracy presents two choices to the people. Voters then go to the polls and opt for the lesser of two evils. I can attest to this first hand, as that is exactly what happened as I cast my vote - my first vote - for John Kerry in 2004. At the time, I felt like it was the right choice. I had done my research. I studied the important issues and where each candidate stood on them. I analyzed Senator Kerry's record, as well as President Bush's. And I made what I felt was an informed decision. I made a crucial mistake though - allowing the corporate subsidiary known as the political establishment to tell me who my choices were.

The same can be said, I'm sure, for many millions of others involved in the political process. Over the past several decades, the two capitalist parties have all but perfected their practice of marginalizing independent candidates, thereby diminishing the already fragile excuse for American democracy.

Too often, we get caught up in who we think can win rather than who we think is the best person for the job. Those two do not always coincide and when they don’t, we have historically surrendered ourselves to a false choice. Even enroute to achieving the cultural milestone of electing the first Black president, voters showed tepid support at first. Senator Obama, at best, received luke-warm backing from most people, including the Black community, until he proved his viability by winning the Iowa Caucuses. Once his description transitioned from the one who should win to the one who could win, then Mr. Obama’s support increased. His following grew even more when he became the candidate who likely would win.

Why the variation in levels of support though – for Obama or any other candidate? What’s with the wait-and-see attitude toward potential elected officials? Why not engage in the process early on and simply back the person who’s best for the job? There are a whole host of answers, reasons, excuses. And there is a rational rebuttal for every one of them. The bottom line is simply this – democracy is not a spectator sport.

Democracy requires rigorous action by those who wish to enjoy it. Corporations are enjoying American democracy thoroughly, as their armies of lobbyists are working against your interests at this very moment. The moneyed-interests have mobilized and so must we. Instead of choosing from the options deemed viable by the two warmongering political parties and by the profit-driven media, we must inform ourselves of the third-party alternatives. And we must do so independently, without concern for electability. When courageous folks dare to challenge this decadent power structure by running for office on a progressive record and platform, We the People must support them. We have to acknowledge and appreciate their lack of comparable funding, as they do not receive the corporate cash bestowed upon Democrats and Republicans. We have to, therefore, assist their message by donating what we can – in time, money and energy. We must actively engage ourselves in electoral politics with the same enthusiasm that we apply to reality television and fantasy football. We have to educate ourselves on the process and the issues, choose a position on the issues, then advocate those positions, in part, by working for the candidate who champions the same stance. It would do well for this nation’s future to have half a dozen choices for president in 2012. In order for that to happen though, it is imperative that we fully endorse those who stick their necks out for the people; brave souls such as Cynthia McKinney, Ralph Nader, Rosa Clemente and Matt Gonzalez.

Of course, other reforms to the political system need to also be implemented; publicly funded campaigns, congressional term limits and abolishment of the electoral college – to name a few. Most importantly, though, we must retain our right and responsibility to think critically for ourselves. Not only is it necessary for a democracy to thrive, but independent thought is absolutely paramount to one’s personal freedom. Carter G. Woodson said that if you control a man’s mind you need not worry about his actions. There are many ways to force our capitalist-controlled government to worry about both our thoughts and actions. One way in particular is to reject the false choice between the lesser of two evils.