warriorhun wrote:That democracy is a sham? That the elections we are allowed to take part in every 4 years is an illusion maintained for us, its catering to the the illusion that we are really participating in politics and decision-making, and the wish of the majority is considered and carried out by the leadership of our countries, therefore there is no need for us to rebel or demand any change? Think on it: are our representatives elected from our midst? Is it fuck: our representatives are elected from lists set up and provided by fuck nows who... And if the real leadership is hiding behind the curtain and want to remain anonymous, why not just put actors on the stage, playing politicias? Obama, Merkel, any other politician can simply be an actor, paid to pose as our leaders...
What do you think? Is it too far-fetched, or does it sound as worth considering?
Far-fetched? I thought everybody knew it's something like that, but I don't think it's as simplistic as a cabal sneaking out and hiring professional actors. First off they're not necessarily people with a stage background. There's plenty of lawyers and news media folks among the politicians, and both those jobs are a kind of acting, though not stage acting.
Second, there are no lists. There's tournaments that weed out whoever is undesirable to the powers that be. Let's say you want to be a politician. Unless you're in some remote area where they might, possibly, elect an independent (who will be totally powerless anyway), you're going to have to be nominated to run for a major political party if you hope to get elected. The nomination process weeds out whoever doesn't tow the party line or cannot do a good acting performance. So even before you get to election, almost everyone fielding themselves for election is already (a) an actor and (b) towing the party line.
Of course, we don't have a one-party state. But two or three parties is actually better for total control. It gives the illusion of choice by presenting a false dichotomy. This works like any other false dichotomy, you give someone two choices, both of which suit you.
The things that the powers that be want to do, are simply divided in half. They will all get done, by one administration or another. Likewise the things that the people want, are divided in half, and then used as a carrot to keep people voting, but none of it will get done. Each party uses the carrot to get support, but when it comes to delivering, they put it off or make like it's impossible, or if they get called out, they just use the fear of the other party and do a Chicken Little routine about the other party winning the next election if they do it.
Control of the whole system is a simple matter of campaign financing and/or promised rewards (seats on the boards of major companies etc) ... most of this is just right out in the open, there is no need to hide it.