r http://www.goupstate.com/article/20120112/articles/120119886?p=1&tc=pg
http://fairtopartlymoderate.blogspot.com/2012/01/and-we-need-to-listen-why.html
In a recent post (linked above) I argued that shutting your doors to political candidates is an improper way to handle your political opinions. Such and action lessen the opportunities (canned or genuine) to meet with candidates and converse with them. This story that broke from South Carolina shows, in my opinion, a better way of letting you political ideals be known.
I side with the gentlemen from South Carolina because he makes his statement with action. Unlike the restaurant in New Hampshire that withdrew, I prefer people make a statement by actually making a statement. Remaining silent in politics means that you will not be heard at all. There is a time and place for silence and silent protest. Politics, particularly American politics, is not one of them. In order to even be considered you must yell to the top of your voice and join the chorus of yells. There are not pillars of solitude in the American politics. Think back over the course of American politics. How many "silent" politicians can you think of? How many have made their names for quietly making noise? "Silent Cal" Coolidge is the only one that comes to mind and even he was overshadowed by most. This is why, I would rather a person publicly pull their support from one person to another than shut their doors to all.
What is unfortunate about both instances is the highlighting of an truth in the American politics. The almighty dollar is what speaks. Would we have heard about either of these stories had they been about ethics? Morals? Political Idealism? I painfully doubt it. While it is easy to bemoan the situation, I ask what can be done about it? Is there something we, the voting public, can do to limit this money madness? I think there is: volunteer. Yes, get out there and pound doors, hand out information, educate the public and write letters to the editor. Make your point with action.
This is what has been lacking in politics for some time, and create the vacuum to be filled with money. It used to be that a politician needed a good pair of shoes, a firm handshake, and warm smile to get votes. By mobilizing massive amounts people around a candidate, political victories could be won with pithy amounts of cash. Yes there will be costs, buttons don't make themselves, flyers aren't printed automatically, and campaign buses don't run on hope, but all of these cost less that air time on major networks. If people simply got off their backsides and away from their computers, we would not need advertisements on every commercial break.
It is possible, and dear we say it, more democratic. If you have ever done any research about politics or history you have inevitable run across events attended by throngs of people. The Republican Convention that nominated Abraham Lincoln comes to mind. William Jennings Bryan spoke to 100,000 people once in Topeka, Kansas. These events are noteworthy because of the shear volume of people. Records for political events will show instances with 2,000 in attendance for a Republican rally, and 2,000 for a Democratic rally the next day. All of this would happen in a town with a population of 800. How is this possible? People cared! And people cared enough to come into town for a political event. People were involved in politics far more than they are now. They payed attention to the goings on. Plus politics was more entertaining than it is now. I would also make the case, because of instances like these, that politics was more Democratic.
I will close by saying get out and campaign. It's better than sitting at home and hearing ALL of the campaign ads (if you campaign you get to hear what you agree).
Curious who I will campaign for? I'm curious about who you will as well. Write me and let me know. Leave a comment here or even on my Facebook page.
No comments:
Post a Comment