Governments and Politicians are Still Liars and Thieves, even with a "Compassionate" Party Having a Grasp on the Major Offices
An Open Letter by Punkerslut to
Information: ReformDemocrats.org Homepage
There isn't much in your message that is all that different from anything you could find anywhere else. In short, the four points you have highlighted for your political organization are: "Weapons of mass destruction will never be used," "Ecological sustainability will be assured," "Economic health and human equality will be fostered," and "Human rights will be protected and extended." This concludes with the statement, "These goals are not utopian." They certainly are not Utopian, and I would imagine you to be in a difficult situation if you were asked to find someone who disagrees.
On top of this, you argue that "ReformDemocrats is unique. Our mission is to confront the long-term problems that our political system ignores, offer solutions for these problems, and work toward the enactment of our program." Opposition to weapons of mass destruction is listed as one of your platform points. Do you really think that our political system ignores it? On the contrary, that seems to be the only thing I have heard any politician say since 2001. "Fighting terrorism," "fighting for freedom," "fighting weapons of mass destruction," etc., etc.. How unique can you be, when your first point is the most common currency in the speeches of political masters?
What about the United States government supplying nuclear arms to Terrorist, rogue states in the Middle East? Why has the United States government cooperated with international military powers that use bombs, terror cells, and assassinations? Why is your political party in favor of a nation that still builds concentration camps and still discriminates against the natives whose land it took? Hey, look, what's this? Is it a photograph of a glove box containing bomb components for nuclear arms that was given to Israel by the US government for spreading terrorism and destruction? Wikipedia.org You bet it is!
Good job with stopping terrorism... by giving the terrorists weapons of mass destruction. Can you explain to me your reasoning in that behavior? Or, at least, your reasoning for joining a political party that exhibits this behavior?
Take the next point offered: "Ecological sustainability will be assured." Like your opposition to weapons of mass destruction, there's a certain ring to this that makes me think it is hollow. Sure, you oppose weapons of mass destruction, and I'm sure everyone does. Do you have any plans, ideas, or thoughts on how we might better oppose them? Not on your website, apparently.
Yes, sustainability must be assured. Do you have any possible idea how to do this? Those who cut down forests and dam up rivers will probably believe that they're doing their work in an ecologically sustainable way, simply because they can come back tomorrow and do the same thing. Your watchwords are the same as those who have hacked the planet's environment to pieces. If you had something meaningful to imply in defending the ecology of earth, it would have to begin with an attack on the existing social organization -- those who profit from the destruction of nature.
By saying you love earth, and that you want to save it, only to use your organizations' resources to produce no change, is bad. You're taking people who may genuinely have a desire to change society, and making them into useless, controlled puppets. "How paranoid you must be!" I'm sure you're thinking. Don't forget that your political party received more donations from the ecologically disastrous BP than any other party. (CNN.com) Don't forget that the president your party has elected was paid in full by those who profit by leveling forests, draining wetlands, and poisoning the oceans.
What should a thinking person take away from the situation? The most powerful politician in the nation, the US President, is receiving campaign funding from a company responsible for the worst oil spill in recent history. What can you imagine is technically happening there? Do you think that it's simply some corporation, fulfilling their patriotic duty, by becoming involved in the political process, and trying to find candidates that want liberty and public prosperity? If you do, then you've never seen a capitalist before in your life -- they don't give money away, every dollar they lose is spent on defending their power. It's quite clear that your party has been bought out by the worst offenders of environmental destruction.
"Economic health and human equality will be fostered" -- again, I cannot imagine finding anyone who disagrees with this, and yet it's one of your points. The problem is that there is no direct translation of this ideal into meaningful practice "Economic health and human equality" can be fostered by nationalists, conservatives, liberals, communists, socialists, even monarchists. The difference is how they believe that such achievements can be brought to society. "Economic health" can be brought by tax breaks for the rich, social spending being directed to private businesses, and sanctioning the exploitation known as wage-slavery -- at least, in the view of the previously named political tendencies.
"Economic health" how? You won't find one person opposed to "economic health" as a concept, only as a means of achieving it. But, there is no plan for this idea. There's only the idea. In practice, you'll produce nothing much different than the Republican Party. Who gives money to the Democratic and Republican Party alike? Well, Nike's produced more than $400,000 in political contributions, and it went to both the Republican and Democratic Parties. (CampaignMoney.com) Think of that: "economic health," for you and your political party, begins with accepting bribes from those who live off of sweatshop factories, mine explosions, and clearcutting forests. Do you feel a contradiction?
Barack Obama in the 2008 election received nearly a million dollars in campaign contributions from the Microsoft Corporation. (OpenSecrets.org) You were elected because you received support from one of the worst offenders of anti-trust laws in US history. In case you haven't studied economics, when a commercial monopoly hoards up a natural resource or land, it's very good for the trust -- and it's very bad for everyone else. Similarly, JP Morgan provided about $700,000. But they're constantly in the news for price-fixing, anti-competitive behavior, selling fake or worthless stock at inflated prices, etc., etc.. (Bloomberg.com)
Your police strangle people to death in the streets for stealing a package of crackers, but not a single CEO has been imprisoned from JP Morgan for its multi-million dollar larceny. Maybe it is a coincidence: JP Morgan pays large sums of money to the guardian of all of society, and in turn, the guardian of society does not guard us against JP Morgan. If something like this happened once, then we might be able to say, "Suspicions of bribery are merely paranoia." But, this is how every corporation works, how every elections runs, how every candidate gets elected. It's not just merely a single case worthy of study -- it's a trend that is inseparable from the history of American Capitalism.
Ultimately, there will be no "economic health" from your plans or your party. All the Democratic Party has done is sanction the worst forms of economic exploitation imaginable.
The last of your articles of faith is "Human rights will be protected and extended." IBM Corp, which uses Chinese slave labor, is another one of your party's contributors: $528,822. When printing out your bumper stickers and managing the phones at your democratic office, does it ever concern you the blood money flowing through everything that you touch? Time Warner gave your party another $590,000, and they've openly stated their desire in investing in a country that still maintains prison camps, censorship, and imprisonment of journalists. (Xinhuanet.com) UBS AG, which provided you with $543,219, has its own real estate venture in the nation where mass trials and mass executions are a codified part of the law. (Reuters.com) (Other Resource: "An Introduction to Chinese Politics," by Harold C. Hinton.)
How are you going to protect and defend "human rights"? Your organization is funded by the forced labor of those who have been imprisoned for advocating human rights. You eat from the tray of human oppression. Why should anyone think of your organization as having the possibility of changing this situation?
Given all the evidence, I think I can give a summary of your views: (a) in each idea you adovacte, it is so general, that it could encompass anyone from any political background, in such a way as to widen those who would vote for you, (b) you offer no practical or meaningful intentions in any of these areas, (c) in action, you violate every single one of those principles as a means of sustaining and building the Democratic Party's political machine.
If you believe in your own values, abandon that mockery of a social organization you participate in. Only then can you begin on a path toward a revolution that provides every individual with everything they need for full, personal development.
I've read and researched your views and ideas. I hope can you do the same for me. Thank you, I patiently await your response.