I'll let you off the Redcoats--someone had to give Europe a wake-up call about the way the nature of war was changing. I would have thrown rotten veg rather than bullets to make the point, but that's just me.
But these examples just illuatrate my point, and if the people responsible were from "my" side of the political fence, it just underlines it in gold and does fancy scrollwork around it with glitter and sequins.
There is a place for integrity and fairness in government. I believe that, you believe that, and I believe the majority believes that. It isn't to be maintained by automatically voting Republican, or Democrat, or Labour (gods know), or Liberal. We have one means of keeping the system itself clean, as opposed to fighting individual injustices or offences, which is what the marching and the lobbying and the writing to the congressperson are for. They're the cure when it's happened or is about to happen. The preventative, the only preventative built into the system, is voting, for the candidates who either best typify, or seem least likely to betray, the values you believe in.
I understand that you and others have reason to feel that Obama is as morally questionable as McCain. I can't argue with that reason. From over here I see a difference in them as individuals, and in their parties as representatives of the majority of people, so it's clear to me how I would vote if I could.
But I stand by what I said. Just because no government has yet abolished elections due to lack of interest doesn't mean it couldn't happen, and in any case doesn't mean there aren't good reasons for reminding them that everyone in the country is (or should be, and why not) awake and taking an interest. The current lot have done enough evil by stealth.
And the little smiley heart dotting the I of my point came from the thread that sparked this, where one of the commenters responded to me to the effect that he wouldn't worry about zero voter response, because there would always be people like me. I rest my case.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2008-10-04 09:55 am (UTC)But these examples just illuatrate my point, and if the people responsible were from "my" side of the political fence, it just underlines it in gold and does fancy scrollwork around it with glitter and sequins.
There is a place for integrity and fairness in government. I believe that, you believe that, and I believe the majority believes that. It isn't to be maintained by automatically voting Republican, or Democrat, or Labour (gods know), or Liberal. We have one means of keeping the system itself clean, as opposed to fighting individual injustices or offences, which is what the marching and the lobbying and the writing to the congressperson are for. They're the cure when it's happened or is about to happen. The preventative, the only preventative built into the system, is voting, for the candidates who either best typify, or seem least likely to betray, the values you believe in.
I understand that you and others have reason to feel that Obama is as morally questionable as McCain. I can't argue with that reason. From over here I see a difference in them as individuals, and in their parties as representatives of the majority of people, so it's clear to me how I would vote if I could.
But I stand by what I said. Just because no government has yet abolished elections due to lack of interest doesn't mean it couldn't happen, and in any case doesn't mean there aren't good reasons for reminding them that everyone in the country is (or should be, and why not) awake and taking an interest. The current lot have done enough evil by stealth.
And the little smiley heart dotting the I of my point came from the thread that sparked this, where one of the commenters responded to me to the effect that he wouldn't worry about zero voter response, because there would always be people like me. I rest my case.