I’m so grateful for the moment I realized the relationship between information, perspective, and context. And how, in the absence of information, perspective is conveniently tilted toward the strongest, bestowing upon the most powerful, the most favor. For example, one could argue that it is within this context that Christopher Columbus is still credited with “discovering” America.
I’ve been watching the Republican primaries mostly from afar this election cycle. And from a distance, I can see clearly the information void being skillfully employed by the candidates, and successfully obliterating any shred of context, and any chance to place our reality in proper perspective. If I could be a casual observer, I’d find the obviousness of the GOPs revisionist historical perspective amusing, as I appreciate good political theater as much as the next chap. But I understand what’s at stake for an America under this brand of Republican leadership, and it becomes frighteningly amusing — real, real heavy emphasis on the frightening part. The fact that Rick Santorum came in second in Iowa, and the fact that Jon Hunstman didn’t make it past third in New Hampshire is just…
To keep it real with y’all as best I can, I try to check myself on a regular basis. Playing the role of devil’s advocate helps keep you on your toes. So I ask myself in earnest, can I understand how Mitt Romney might have
some a changes change of mind at multiple various stages in his political career life? Sure, I can. New information can change the game, right? It’d be ridiculous to still be afraid of sailing off the edge of the world, right? (’cause the world is round, y’all. #pointoffact) If Mitt Romney’s changing opinion was based on new experience or new information, then that adds context to the perspective that he’s merely a “flip-flopper.” And I can respect that.
That’s “if” I supported Romney, which I don’t. And it has nothing to do with his revolving positions. I can’t support any of the Republican candidates because, in my view, they’re all actively engaged in perpetuating a false narrative. Barack Obama’s economic policies aren’t responsible for the lethargy in our economy, or the decline in our imperial** global standing. What we’re experiencing is 30 years in the making. It is a direct result of the scourge of capitalism — greed, and of greed’s enabler — the deregulated free market. It is a result of our reluctance to adapt to a 21st century world where global leadership is increasingly multipolar, and the proletariat both desires, and believes it deserves more.
Romney and his cohorts want us to believe that corporations and millionaires will get shafted if their taxes are raised, or if they have to contribute more to protecting the basic rights and dignity of the laborer. In other words, if corporations paid you a better- than-decent wage, provided you with better-than-decent benefits, and a better-than-decent work environment, then somehow they’d lose. You might be better off, but they’d lose.
Yo, we made the investment in enrich the rich and see what happens policies already, and the returns were, well, shitty. So while And I’m Proud to Be an American soars amidst streaming photos of corn fields and white families, don’t believe the hype. These Republican cats aren’t about that farm and steel-mill life for real — that is, unless they’ve struck a deal with the chemical company who genetically engineers the feed, or the Governor who’s threatened to do away with union rights. Finally, here’s a tip because I care: Mitt Romney wouldn’t hang out with you if you weren’t on his campaign stop. And he probably prefers a gently chilled red to whatever you got in a can. His interests aren’t your interests. I don’t care how acceptably Mormon he is, or how viril he appears (as demonstrated by siring 5 strapping boys), if forced to choose policies that benefit you first as opposed to X Corp, Inc., I betcha he don’t choose you. Romney just doesn’t strike me as the type of guy to commission a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau if it meant he’d piss off some corporate colleagues. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.
So I said all that to say: Obama ’12. Bring it.
**The United States is an empire; it has acted at times in the interest of self-indulgence and benevolence. But whatever the case, it acted as an empire.