                                                                  #
 anada   "Divergent Tendencies of                                 #          
 226         the American Political    +###           +###    +####    +###  
                  System"             #    #  #  #   #    #  #    #   #    # 
                                by   #     #  # ##  #     #  #    #  #     # 
 03                         Jphish   #    .#  ## #  #    .#  #   .#  #    .# 
 dec                                  *###  * #   *  *###  * *###  *  *###  *
 2000 .+#################################################################.net

        Good day everyone.  What an exciting time it is for those of us who
 are Americans, and those who gaze from afar at this time in world political
 history.  To reiterate the subject of analysis, I would like to mention the
 circumstances of situation.  The American political system has always been
 under the influence of large parties and most notably in recent times, the
 democrats and republicans.  The electoral college of the U.S. makes the
 emergence of new parties in the system a near absurdity.  The debate
 commission for the debate at the University of Massachusetts took this into
 consideration when selecting their speakers, neglecting tertiary candidates
 as a waste of interest, time, and financial focus.  Mr. Nader is the present
 candidate representing the Green Party, a group most people in this room are
 more familiar with than the average American.  Mr. Nader, along with all
 other presidential candidates, was denied participation in this event.
 However, this gentleman was able to obtain a ticket to the debate, but was
 denied the freedom to even be an observer.

        How you may question, could this come about?  To gain an appreciation
 of the significance of the denial, understand the American political
 process.  The law of that land is divergent: composed by the evolution of
 common law, the values of the public opinion, the function of various
 peoples interlaced though land and culture, and a system of governing under
 the crucial scrutiny of both the media and their sponsors.  From the
 outside, America is a child with out control over her temper.  She is
 capable of spreading her vision of prosperity hope and property in a land
 balancing the desires for liberty and equality.  That liberty provides her
 citizens with freedom: an "and it harm none, do as ye will" mentality.  Ah,
 but that liberty has a cost.  When my freedoms overstep yours, we cannot
 have equality.  So we place limits upon the liberties of individuals and
 increase moral and productivity for all.  In doing so, child America is
 capable of producing sentiments of engineering marvels and treaties
 promising peace in a turbulent worldview.  Make her angry and she can be
 motivated through necessity to create horrendous weapons and a stack of
 violated promises; she is capable of choosing hedonistic desires over
 other's welfare.  Overcoming the holocaust of her natives and the slavery of
 her workers and despite the development of nuclear technology, she has
 projected humankind to the moon, and America into the mentality of the
 world's citizens.  She will continue to adapt to the desires of her people
 no matter the spectrum of their morality.  

        To this flexibility we owe the wisdom of her founders, despite their
 personal flaws, the vision of the U.S. Constitution.  Evoke the society of
 America's past.  A near mythos imparted into the conscious of the American
 populous is: their elected officials have the same interests as the stated
 planks composing one's platform.  Certain, I can be assured the official is
 looking out for some of my interests out of concern for the people and
 additionally for his or her continued power.  I question if the initial
 intentions are the same as the legislative aftermath.  Suppose those in
 power have an ability to shine in the spotlight and make it into the
 political arena.  To do so one would be securing in the assumption the
 candidate is informed on the issues.  To obtain information one must have
 the availability of both information and opportunities to express ideas.
 This would be a model of one who is a professional and of some economic
 stability.  Once appointed, there exist multiple outlets for changes in
 political interests, as outside forces encode their wishes through financial
 support.  It would be safe to assume an Elite Theory of governing holds true
 the higher one goes up the political ladder.

        I do not wish to indicate corruption is the force driving
 legislation.  Alliances of politicians with supporters is simply necessary.
 These supporters come in the forms of private, business, and fellow elected
 persons' interests.  We form these groups to make our voices heard through
 organization and support structures.  A Pluralist Theory helps to establish
 the convergence of political interests into established parties.  Thus far
 we have only examined the motive for the strong party system.  Let us relate
 this to the presidency.  Foremost, the president is a symbol of America's
 vision enveloped in the body of one human, a symbol the world associates
 with our status.  The only individual the entire citizenship can vote for
 within the confines of legal limitations.  One individual who makes policy
 and appoints others in high power, leaving a legacy of influence long after
 their term.

        Now rightful citizens of Florida experience their freedom to vote
 being ripped away from them.  They are rightfully outraged as even the
 voting process makes current techniques questionable.  Similarly, Nader who
 had reasonable support for an outsider, was denied a right to voice his
 platform.  Indeed the council must limit the candidates at some point, with
 countless unknown persons running for this position.  Would it be fair to
 say Mr. Nader didn't have a chance because he was no friend to the media?
 Well to be successful in this high risk venture you need to play the public
 relations game.  The media must find you likeable, or at least news worthy.
 Without support of the greater media, citizens have a most difficult time
 encountering information of any relevance on the candidate's nature.

        Once again I will bring up the influence of financial support since
 America is capitalistic in virtue.  If one entered an American high school
 they would observe a model U.S.  Advertising would be in the form of some
 large international soda corporation plastering the halls with a propaganda
 monopoly.  See the Pepsi machines in the commons and the Pepsi scoreboard
 proudly functioning in the field.  The image of the soda bottle is burned
 into the impressionable youth.  Thus too is the political system of two
 parties into the mentality of the nation.  And the large corporate sponsors
 admire the race from a distance and enjoy their purchased pawns.  I ask:
 where is the balance of democracy if you are left with only two options?

        Of course the issue under fire is not the Constitutional setup for
 the election process, but the manner by which Americans learn about their
 future representatives.  The States lack the benefit of U.K.'s BBC without
 advertisements.  Our public airwaves would provide the optimum forum for
 debates, however few care enough to support such endeavors.  And so by
 broadcasting debates over private a private medium, special interests are
 thrust into power of what should be an open discussion.  The American people
 do have a voice, unfortunately it comes in the form of carefully psycho-
 analyzed commercials fine tuned to specific interests.

        The matter of Ralph Nader nor any other candidate being present in
 the debate is out of our control.  In fact, we can not justify our desires
 onto the debate being hosted by the committee.  It is not an issue of who
 can be let on stage, but who has the right to observe the event.  Any
 rightful ticket holder had a right to be a witness in their corresponding
 locality.  Finally, we are left with the question as to how Mr. Nader lost
 his legal right to be in attendance.  For this I have no concrete solution.
 Perhaps it was an incorrect judgement in human error.

        To be human consists of more obligations than physical presence.  We
 cannot be totally objective.  Therefore, we rely on a balance between our
 motives and abilities to reason.  It is the passions of the people who
 develop a nation's morality and philosophical idealisms of policy.  Our
 rights will not be defended if we do not speak out for them.  Thanks to
 Ralph Nader for raising his voice and bringing awareness to a non-idealized
 perception of the system.

 .+##########################################################################

 anada226 by Jphish                                                  (c) 2000
 ###################################################################anada.net
