Obama vs Macain


That observation above has very basic identity assumptions within it. The former does imply that there is a need to be addressed, while the later, that there are insecure needs to be conserved. One does cater to inequities, to hopes and dreams for a better life. The other is essentially defensive, presumably to protect some advantage held, real or imaginary. It looks to have its identities abstractions re-validated, and so, someone to follow.

The conventions go on to, sure, to promise everything in a way, but mostly, seek out those identity attachment issues that will serve their philosophical rationalizations as to who “We the People”, actually are. There is a vested interest of denial and diversion of some kind, to argue that red or blue are really right or wrong. The neutral, the ambiguous, the transcendent questions, are then excluded from discussion.

The two party system is set up to be compromised and taken over, since in that grey area that is off the radar, predatory interest can establish a stealthy beachhead beyond analysis. Abstractions can then be rendered into Trojan Horse like deception, being the opposite of what they claim to be, yet unseen and quite dangerous.


Unlike what we will hear from the right wing, last evening, those watching witnessed what would be an activist president. We saw what the tone of leadership would be. It was not about being fearful and withdrawing into the cut tax and make government only of the rich and powerful. That will be on TV in its make believe play shortly.

It is hard to escape the individual conscious identity components of that proclamation; that one group appeals to the insecurities in the public that are endemic to their seemingly unendowed position in society. The other must declare those insecurities a lack of character, while it stimulates the insecurities of those who have a relative advantage or would want to. The objective is to both demean the party that organically has a larger base, into one where the perception of self identity is negative. Abstraction and negative tagging become essential to this attempt to switch identity interest. All while the advantaged base must be catered to; stimulating the insecurities to its keeping what it has.


It is fortunate that a democracy has no interest in having a one party state, but we seem to be being polarized, not to accept difference but to eradicate it. Without an intrinsic sense of pluralism, as especially some religious and corporate groups are evolving to do without, we face the likelihood of an ever increasing pressure to demean diversity and demonize the intentions of those supporting most any minorities rights.

It then becomes a viable strategy, to make the negatively tagged apparent majority representation party, out to be a negative interest group out to take without giving. Fundamental human identity interest are manipulated, relying on the assumption that there is a kind of person, a have not in some respect, who wants to get something for nothing. The tribal “other” of us and them absolutism. These have not’s are seen to have not because they deserve not—-even life, unless they accept the negative frame of the have’s.

Yet in a context where fact and fiction are called fair and or balanced, a one way street of perception can come into being, where if someone wanted to contradict what I just said, they could say I just represent a biased interest, regardless if the issues involved are truthful or deceptive. This philosophical relativism has made such statements as “common sense” rendered completely subjective. Even if I speak the truth here, you could say that since I do not agree with everyone, I contradict my own philosophy of pluralist acceptance.

Most people know of someone who more or less seems that way. The minor challenge then, is to extrapolate that “tendency” out to entire classes of the population. Also this rationalization serves to divert ones own perception and self awareness from the many economic pyramid schemes that give certain big “success” stories a whole lot of unending grand income off of doing not so much. This is an attempt to codify a view toward humankind which itself is negative, but only to certain kinds of taking, again defined by those “in power”.

This is easy to rationalize, by associating the society and worlds problems, with all those problem producing masses who from a “have” view, want something for nothing. That these mostly materialism based pyramid schemes are racing the earth towards resource depletion, environmental and social degradation, is all kept off the radar. Spaceship earth can then be viewed as an unlimited resource whose misuse will suffer no consequence, particularly to individuals identity framing. Conservatism will go on to reframe any problem to be caused by someone else, or suddenly everybody, but not by the self serving first forces of exploitation.

Emotionalized attachments of cause and effect are easy to engineer into “proof”. This is always a challenge to dominator groups seeking to preserve their privileged status; make privilege represent personal achievement identity, and lack of privilege, an identity in failure. Thus those without, (be it presumably without the right “faith” God, values or material endowments) are assumed to be undeserving via ad-hominem “connection” of the dots by essentially subjective emotionalized positive and negative character traits.


Coming up next will be an exercise in denial and a passing off of responsibility. If you know conservatism, you can bank on denial and blame. Platitudes will be offered over and over, along with so called experience and strength. We will be told how the party of special elite interest, is suddenly the “grown ups”, a self described feature of the 2000 election that would only be originally offered by the emotionally childish. Though I doubt they will use that term again. It will be reconfigured into today’s buzz words to follow.

The party of alleged hope and inclusion of all, the more liberal one, certainly has its own contradictions. Corporate self interest are attempting to have their advantage over the commons, declared the interest of America itself. The “party of the people” is known for talking a good talk, then tip toeing with their own special interest to where they want their own needs fulfilled first.

It is unfortunate that until we can achieve a three or more party system, where one party has to make good on delivering its promises to another, we will be held in this two party vice grip. Both parties can promise all they want now, deliver what ever they will, then say; well you really have no choice, its us or you know who. In the corporate dominated world we are being surrendered to, the full weight being placed upon our shoulders is hardly ever mentioned, as the rich get richer and the middle class and poor carry all the consequence.


The more people oriented party will sit on the sidelines, while the party of enhanced fantasy claims both its maturity and its representation of all We the People. Suddenly, quite possibly, the party that blackmailed America, by fear, into fighting a resource-oil war for the primary benefit of the supper rich, who’s taxes they keep cutting, these exploiters of the commons will claim to be your real best an last defense. Then we will witness all the fuzzy math based glory it bestows upon itself via the accomplishments of all the American people. How warm and fuzzy, but full of that fantasy strength it will be.

The party of most denial and crippled ability to accept responsibilities, or the consequence of its arrogant, self centered and righteous actions, will walk into this fantasy bubble, filled with the hot air of success and achievement appropriated by the lives and hard work of those who actually serve America first. The party of contempt for the commons, as well as the rights of regular women and men, will claim to be their champion. They will ask us to rewrite the recent history of cronyism, exploitation, moral and ethical degradation, then allude that those self serving corruptions are actually the character of liberals.

As I said, the party of fantasy, where wishes are called reality, and the common hope’s, dreams and concerns of all the rest of America; inappropriate to their view of America.  Now they just need true believers to buy into it.  No accident that so called people of “faith” are such easy marks to herd as sheep to slaughter.

The contempt for the American public embodied in the abstract fantasy show, is partly based on that discredited and contemptuous “Trickle down theory”. By serving the rich and powerful, they believe earnestly in their own private gain, that all of our boats are raised. It begs the reality check of the evidence that everyone actually does better under the liberal regime.

And that is always the conservatives challenge. Reality must be turned on its head, where up is down, strength is actually fear based exploitation, and freedom, really the rights of the few to dominate and expropriate for the many. In their view of “We the People”, hidden behind the flags, God, patriotism and the smoke and mirror diversions of “moral values”, something indeed will be trickling down to the majority of Americans, it just will not be the truth.


Here is more food for thought on how perceptions are morphed into beliefs that come back to haunt the believers and non believer alike. This happens as we think we are just doing what needs to be done to “get ahead” or possibly even to survive.

Slant Magazine Film Review: The Corporation

Directors Jennifer Abbott and Mark Achbar apply the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders to demonstrate that the corporation is psychotic