All - Just sort of a short essay on a thought I had during a conversation today; for those who would endulge me.


Today’s congress is similar in many ways to those of generations before, but significantly different in one very important aspect. And the end of all the railing at the pulpit, at the end of the day, in the pre-information age congress, there was room for a compromise; and as such, Congress worked despite their differences.

But now there is very little compromise. The “Win/Win” is a lost concept. Now it’s just win or you lose.

Much of this is just dealing with the fact we now live in the information age. In the past, a politician can throw out his/her partisan rhetoric knowing full well it was only that; and then vote for some sort of compromise that made sense. In an instance where the electorate wanted to hear something in order to support a politician, but the politician knowing his/her electorate is mostly “wrong” on the issue, could use his/her judgment to do what he/her thought was the right thing for America. But now in the information age, anyone can fact check, and there is complete transparency of all words and actions of said politicians. Now their constituency will ask the question. “if you said it, then why didn’t you vote for it?” “If you said it, don’t you mean it?” And no way in hell can a politician come back and say, “I had to say it because you idiots actually believe that nonsense”.

In the old days you had room for the Newt’s of the world to say one thing about Global Warming to his constituency, yet do something entirely different because he felt it was the right thing to do. Let’s face it, we do not have a well educated electorate. Our electorate is more and more educated by sound bytes and through entertainment sources such as Radio or TV talk shows aimed at sensationalistic agendas to push up ratings. In the past our politicians often saved us from ourselves. And while that may sound a bit repulsive to many, it’s the same ones who are repulsed by that statement who they were probably saving us from to begin with. We voted for a representative we trusted to do the right thing. We as citizens are not PolySci laureates so we send someone to Washington who makes politics his/her job. And for a long time, they did their job pretty damned well (looking back).

So you have a situation where a conservative politician has to push something like a monetary policy based on Monetarism even though Monetarism is thoroughly debunked, even by the intelligentsia and academics of their own party. But since most of conservative ideals are based on Monetarism, far too many have hung their hat and reputations on such ideals. The politician clearly sees that Monetarism is dead and we must return to some semblance of Keneysian economics if this nation is to survive. But he’s stuck, because for 20 years he has sold Monetarism, and now we have complete transparency that will show this guy is a firm believer of Monetarism, which is as dead as the Flat Earth theroy. In essence, the information age SHOULD be driving advances and evolution of policy due to the greater availability of information, when in fact, it’s having the paradoxical effect of muting changes because now someone has to admit they were wrong about something.

So we as voters have screwed ourselves; we believed the rhetoric. But now that it has been proven wrong ( and just as many examples exist for the left, I use Monetarism just because it came first to mind…Gun Control could be used on the left amongst other things), we won’t be able to bring about a change to more sound policy because we as voters haven’t received the message that Monetarism is dead, because none of the people the voters listen to have to stones to say it’s dead...The Emperor is wearing clothes. And I’m betting it will be a good 20 or more years before the average guy on the street learns that experiment failed, because it will be that long until someone who’s not made a career off of such a thing can be heard by the masses (or maybe longer). So we run the risk of decades more of un-sound fiscal policy because a politician won’t admit he/she was wrong, because it will cost them their job (uh…term limits anyone?) and possibly their reputation.

So this is really growing pains as we move from one age to another, and it makes me wonder if America will survive these growing pains.

Disinformation is the new currency.

FrontSight wrote:But now in the information age, anyone can fact check, and there is complete transparency of all words and actions of said politicians.

Anyone can, but piss few do.

"Rush said it, I believe it, that settles it."

SwampGrouch wrote:

FrontSight wrote:But now in the information age, anyone can fact check, and there is complete transparency of all words and actions of said politicians.

Anyone can, but piss few do.

"Rush said it, I believe it, that settles it."

Yup. Most of the extreme righties that I know, and I know more than a few living here in the heart of Looney-Land, base their opinions on the last forwarded emails they receive. The stupid fucks not only DON'T fact check, they ignore data provided by others who do.

It can be a problem for some people to fact check, because the content of those propaganda emails are complete lies. When you go to do a search you only turn up 1000's of conservative propaganda sites to re inforce your notion that it's true. Add to that, most of these folks are convinced that Fox news is the only credible source of information. If they didn't hear it on fox, it isn't true.

On another gun forum they're whipped up into a lather over the Small Arms Treaty. They don't have a clue as to the facts. You point them to Snopes and they don't consider it legit. You point them to Factcheck.org and they say it was affiliated with Obama... Even though Glenn Beck cites both of these sources when it's convenient.

The Democrats need a propaganda system like the republicans. The repubs have mastered the art of propaganda in the information age. I have always wondered where are all those propaganda scare emails originate. Who is the source. If you look at the seemingly simple html formatting, it's obvious it's coming from a few professional sources. Even the major news networks are so scared of losing ratings they have pulled right of center the last several years. You don't see them covering the Koch brothers or getting in Murdocks shorts.

CrabbyAzz wrote:
The Democrats need a propaganda system like the republicans. The repubs have mastered the art of propaganda in the information age. I have always wondered where are all those propaganda scare emails originate. Who is the source. If you look at the seemingly simple html formatting, it's obvious it's coming from a few professional sources. Even the major news networks are so scared of losing ratings they have pulled right of center the last several years. You don't see them covering the Koch brothers or getting in Murdocks shorts.

Great idea about getting our own propaganda system, but working with Liberals is like herding cats. I'm not sure we'd ever be able to settle on a message that we'd all get behind, the way Conservatives do. What's that old saying, "Liberals fall in love .. Conservatives fall in line." LOL

I my opinion, the reason the MSM doesn't go after the likes of the Koch brothers
and/or the Murdock types is because Liberal politicians, like their Conservative counter parts, or also owned by big monied interests. WE THE PEOPLE have no representatives. We are on our own now.

Add this to the list of problems with free and open information on the internet:

http://dontbubble.us/

Nice to know about, now that scroogle has been strangled.

LibShooter wrote:

CrabbyAzz wrote:I my opinion, the reason the MSM doesn't go after the likes of the Koch brothers and/or the Murdock types is because Liberal politicians, like their Conservative counter parts, or also owned by big monied interests. WE THE PEOPLE have no representatives. We are on our own now.

Yep...such is the nature of our political system. In US politics ONLY money talks.

I say we bring back dueling. Alexander Hamilton, one of America's first liberals, might be rolling over in his grave, but so what?

troutkiller wrote:I say we bring back dueling. Alexander Hamilton, one of America's first liberals, might be rolling over in his grave, but so what?

Would not matter one bit. The rules of dueling allow one to turn down a duel, for which the only reprise is a modest bit of shame, and US politicians have lost the ability to feel shame.