Prompted by “How To Speed Up Marijuana Legalization Through Voting”: http://www.hightimes.com/read/how-speed-marijuana-legalization-through-voting
When it comes to influencing the public sector, if you’re not working in the public sector, you have the power to — drum roll — vote.
The prompting piece passionately presses upon the (preferably young) reader’s mind to vote, because the author of that piece claims that’s how social progress occurs.
On the contrary, I believe (and feel the whole truth and nothing but reinforces) that the mechanism of regular citizen power over the public sector is tragically laughable.
In general (and I think I’m being kind on that), I get to vote for team blue’s selfish liar (whom wants people I care about literally in prison for no good reason), or team red’s selfish liar (whom wants the same thing). The system isn’t just horribly rigged (e.g. prominent debates powerfully pressing for a two-party system, despite the unhealthy public nature of that severely limiting duality). The system is a terrible joke that will logically crumble into another revolution against abusive law.
Meanwhile, there’s a growing public sector army (with some people having tenure) well outside the reach of even that pitiful citizen input system called political elections.
According to the show Brain Games on the National Geographic Channel, the politician who merely looks more trustworthy wins the election the vast majority of the time (regardless of any other point).
I’m registered to vote, and I do vote when I feel knowledgeable enough to fairly weigh in on an issue (e.g. cannabis legalization), but the value of that input is clearly a pittance still undesirably yielding an oligarchy rampantly violating the rule-of-constitutional-law without obvious consequences for public satisfaction.
The public is clearly frustrated with this continuing degradation of our nation for the sake of selfish liars, despite uselessly pulling the lever towards blue or red.
Team blue and team red are basically team public sector and team private sector respectively. But that competition is a powerful distraction from the clear truth — when it comes to power over the masses, the sector line is irrelevant.
People in power from the private sector sometimes work in the public sector and vice versa. Lobbying groups of all kinds (including those heavily financed by private sector interests) are truly impacting public policy. Therefore, it’s accurate to call our governing force an oligarchy (obviously spanning both sectors). The real fundamental governing issue is how much power (and what style of power) does the oligarchy have over the remaining citizenry, and what needs to be done to ensure a balance of power exists to keep the oligarchy in check (balance is always needed for stability). A voting lever is clearly not enough.
Growing either the public or private sector grows oligarchical (effective governing) power.
If there’s someone or something you want to vote for, then vote, but the time spent in doing so needs factoring.
I have no problem with people governed by power being the dominating influence of how that power can be wielded. That’s even how our nation is supposed to work, but necessarily with a judicially upheld unalienable right to liberty to prevent abusive law — a right illegally ignored and disarmed by destructively judicially misinterpreting amendment nine in the Bill of Rights.
But voting has been reduced to a sick response by an excessively uncaring society outrageously vulnerable to unfettered reason abuse that too often forms law abuse.
After experiencing the ignition of the Information Age, it makes sense that the Education Age (relying upon entertainment for interest) follows. You want real influence? Support the responsible leaders of that upcoming Age, because they’re going to change the world by way of the “pen” that’s mightier than the “sword” (and might makes right — not a pitiful mass voting lever).
Instead of being limited to a lever with grossly limited influence, you have the power to engage online (and off) through voting (e.g. liking), sharing, commenting, posting, etc. Your direct expression can even go informatively viral around the world.
What too many people fail to realize is the Internet, by way of the organization of the masses (the most dominating human influence upon sufficient organization), is the true government.
Online pressures (against certain prohibitionists literally incapable of sustaining even one honest point in their favor) contribute heavily to ending Cannabis Prohibition. The voting lever is merely the mechanism to achieve legitimacy in the public record — still with harsh limits painfully slowing down the legalization process to the suffering of many non-violent lives (while one proper public exposure of the obvious illegal redefining of the Commerce Clause must inevitably lawfully and instantly shut down the whole Certain Drug Prohibition scam like a light switch — an enormous “elephant in the room” with rippling effects towards relevant state and local laws by way of the Supremacy Clause).
However, the Internet is vulnerable to the same absence of public care allowing oligarchical players rig the online world to their liking.
Control the information and you control the world.
The oligarchy can determine who has convenient access to online expression (e.g. people supporting the oligarchy’s actually questionable, if not outright bogus, judicial plans to “protect the children”). They can edit public consensus to their liking to persuade the masses. Once the computer commonly disappears into the brain for some future generation, they can even measure your emotions combined with your online expressions to use a censorship algorithm similar to what Facebook uses — to automatically shut your negative influence against “righteous” power down. With thought control becoming a future certainty, according to credible technological advances heading in that direction these days, oligarchy’s will have the power to literally directly change your mind to their liking. I cannot think of a more serious “red flag” to passionately ignite public pressure continuously to protect the Internet against reason (and law) abuse, but the public has excessively been manipulated by reason abuse to find reason abuse practical and necessary for progress.
Of course, it’s safe to assume that there will be rebellious technology disabling that oligarchical infringement (a powerful privacy industry), but the resulting mind wars will have severely devastating consequences upon our species.
Excessively publicly taking things for granted combined with an absence of courage is the slow and painful (but well-earned) suicide of the masses — the human fuel of any oligarchy, so an oligarchy taking advantage of such ignorance is equally suicidal.
Living life with a sustained honest effort towards positivity in an often brutal world is fundamentally always needed. That enormously transcends the power of the public sector voting lever. That extremely brings out the best in you (regardless of the situation), and has influential rippling effects throughout the masses reaching into posterity.