Romney And Obama Are Both Committed To The Same Bad Policies

When voters elect the lesser of two evils, they legitimize evil with their votes

By Lawrence Hunter

The American electoral system is rigged to guarantee that voters can choose only between Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee, who both are owned by the big-money elites that created and sustain them.  This cozy arrangement is the American establishment’s operationalization of V.I. Lenin’s dictum, “The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.”

Such an arrangement ensures that candidates are acceptable to the military-industrial-government-financial establishment (MIGFE for short) that controls the country.  This corrupt system short-circuits democracy, leaving candidates that are unacceptable to MIGFE stranded without access to the ballot and forcing voters into the untenable position of having to choose between the lesser of two evils.

But it’s worse than that, even. The rigged electoral system not only limits the field of candidates but also restricts the range of issues considered.  MIGFE’s campaign technicians rig campaigns so that elections turn largely on incendiary wedge issues (e.g., abortion, school prayer, gay marriage) and personalities (e.g., religion and personal background) rather than the fundamental issues that determine the fate of nations.  American democracy has turned into the electoral version of Prohibition:  Voters are offered a choice between Coke and Pepsi while fortified, adult alternatives are strictly off the menu.

While the electorate is agitated in a political sugar high and kept in emotional turmoil over relatively insignificant wedge issues and peripheral matters of personality, candidates get a free pass to avoid confronting the fundamental issues facing the country, matters on which both MIGFE candidates basically agree: Expanding Empire America and waging perpetual war, restricting liberty, extinguishing privacy and expanding the nanny state into a national health-and-security police state, preserving the Federal Reserve and fiat money, maintaining the income tax, extending government regulation of commerce and markets, building the welfare-state Ponzi pyramid higher—entitlement payoffs for the hoi polloi; subsidies, protection and bailouts for big banks and corporations.

The dirty little secret of American democracy is that what the two MIGFE parties disagree about is minor and largely insignificant in the larger scheme of things; on the issues that matter to the nation’s future, they agree, to the detriment of the vast majority of the people.  Democracy without a choice is no democracy at all; it is a hoax.  MIGFE democracy is a put-up job that scares and deludes people into legitimizing their own enslavement to masters who take their money, their freedom, their privacy, their very humanity in the name of security and the greater good but actually to feather MIGFE’s own nests and satisfy their megalomania and obscene lust for power, from the bosses in control to the thugs and functionaries on governments’ payrolls.

Do voters understand that when they vote for the lesser of two evils they get…evil:  More war; more unemployment; more oppression; more inflation; more regulations; more bailouts; bigger government; more debt? A few do; most don’t.

Do voters understand that when they succeed in electing the candidate they perceive to be the lesser of two evils, they actually get still greater evil?  Virtually none do.  In a recent video, Allen Keyes explains how the perceived lesser evil becomes the greater evil once in office (I paraphrase):

Here you have Mitt Romney, a man with a record that shows he has supported and implemented many of the things conservatives proclaim to hate aboutBarack Obama, including government healthcare and indefinite detention under the NDAA.  Suddenly, all those things when advocated by Mitt Romney don’t represent a threat to the country? How can this be?  If I see Mitt Romney come along and I see in his background the tendency to implement the same policies I hate that Barack Obama promotes, which will have the same deadly effect on the nation, on what grounds am I supposed to say I prefer Romney?

There’s one salient difference between Romney and Obama:  Romney succeeded in implementing all manner of bad policies in Massachusetts; Obama has been unable to implement most of his bad policy proposals because he has met with such conservative resistance.  If Romney gets into the White House disguised as a conservative, it will silence most of the conservative opposition to the bad policies, which Obama would have faced, and consequently Romney will be able to get them through.

Why is it the people think that the guy who is failing to get these bad policies through is the greater evil while the guy who is committed to the same policies, who will probably be able to get them through once he is in the White House, is considered the lesser of two evils?

When voters elect the lesser of two evils, they legitimize evil with their votes, and the lesser evil becomes the greater evil as opposition to it evaporates in the partisan euphoria and solidarity of electoral victory.  When voters legitimize evil with their votes, they assume responsibility for the evil done in their name, whichever of the two evils they voted for.