"Popular" Candidates and Movements
During the last go round (2008) the establishment chose to poo-poo the fiscal responsibility/sound money platform through censorship and marginalization -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlacFmRGPgI ... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQv0KtbeWXo ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VgAOBR4eYo&feature=related (sure sounds like canned laughter on that one! ...)
So even though Ron Paul destroyed everyone in the debates, it was these media ops that prevailed, along with the media ops which presented the chosen one in messianic fashion. But next time could, and probably will, be different. That hypnotic pendulum swings back and forth, making us feel like something magical is occurring, that checks and balances are at work. The establishment could easily use Ron Paul, whether beknownst to him or not, to their advantage, just at they will reintroduce the electric car en masse at the appropriate time (after its debut in the 1830s ...). We should keep in mind that in Hegelian dialectic, the "no" politicians (like Ron Paul) can be just as useful as the "yes" politicians (like Palin, Romney ... ) All are groomed as the overclass sees fit. This is how history is written (in think tanks and elite round table groups), and how all important events transpire. Control of the media is the key here.
So even if Ron Paul gains traction going forward, it will come at a (hidden) cost.. If his advocacy of fiscal responsibility, for example, becomes popular in the mass media, his beliefs about ending the war and withdrawing troops around the globe will not. Or, troop withdrawal in one area will be the focus, but not where troops remain or where new occupations are occurring ... Any "populist" or "grass roots" movement, whether masquerading as libertarian, constitutional, green or anything else, cannot make it's way onto the big stage without serious help. And by the time it gets there it will be turned on it's head, watered down, defanged, and turned into a useless piece of window dressing, calling for an institutionalized masses to cheer on command, like with everything else. Feel good operations abound. If they ever do decide to fix the broken money system, some other mechanism of control will slip in through the back door. Similarly, when they finally decide to address pollution, it will come at a great cost to the common man, and/or great benefit to the uncommon (multinational) one. The ego loves to come to his own funeral.
Therefore, I can offer only the same conclusion I
have shared before, namely that it seems very unlikely that any
meaningful change could come from the very apparatus that is so
corrupt. We never voted oligarchy in, therefore it seems a tall
order to think we can vote it out. I would suggest then that we
look for change outside that apparatus, where any one of us could point
to a thousand possibilities ... in arenas a lot closer to home where we
have power, and in ways that will bring real, measurable,
transformative change. Resistance is important. But I don't
think it can come through the "political process" or in the form of a
vote, which is precisely why they have us fixated there. The best
judgement is is always our own innate, common sense, and what we know
our own, individual sensibilities to be. No one knows those
better than we ourselves do. Therefore ask yourself, "how best can I
advance the cause of my family, friends and community, given my limited
time and resources?" Through some apparatus controlled by the
establishment?
Through a "political" process?
From the day we are born we are surrounded by mandates of all
flavors which seem to have a life plan for us.
Kind of presumptuous,
I think, don't you? And a presumption that undermines the whole
point of living.