First up, there's no cause for apologies. I didn't take offence at your statements. They weren't directed at me personally and I appreciate that.
The point I was making is that you are clearly extremely hostile to my position on this (ideologically, not personally). And while I understand your position, I am probably just as ideologically hostile to it as you are to mine. Because of this, any attempt to discuss this matter will -- more than likely -- produce far more heat than light.
The fact is we have fundamentally different political philosophies. And I'm not talking about right/left or liberal/authoritarian ideas; I'm talking about a basic disagreement about what politics should involve.
You view your position as "pragmatic" in essence (correct me if I'm wrong on any of this by the way). And I get that completely. From a certain perspective that is the position that makes the most sense. I don't deny that, and I don't blame anyone for seeing the world from that perspective. It is a result of your own lifetime's worth of personal experiences and you are trapped within it.
Just as I am within my own.
And that's really the issue. My own personal experiences have led me to view the world from a very different perspective. Every life is unique of course, but equally there is a sense in which most of us share a lot of common experience. This was not really the case for me. My own life has been extremely atypical and further from the norm than most (largely down to the choices my parents made incidentally rather than anything I engineered). This is the primary reason -- I believe -- that I disagree with 'the majority' on damn near every issue.
And please let me stress, this is not a case of "my perspective is better than yours". It's just different. And occasionally, I believe (sorry if this sounds patronising or arrogant or egocentric or whatever) this may allow me to see things that the majority fail to see.
Ultimately I have reached the conclusion that we are living in a civilisation / culture than is fundamentally flawed. Not just that it's bad for those within it (though it certainly is that) but that it is dangerous for every living thing on the planet. More than that, I have reached the conclusion that something needs to be done about this immediately. That we have already set in motion a chain of events that will cause suffering and death on an historically unprecedented scale. And every single day that passes in "business as usual" mode is a day we will soon come to regret.
I would like to think that we can avert the worst of the catastrophe voluntarily and with as much generosity of heart as we can muster. That is hope though, not expectation. In truth, I expect us to continue reinforcing the damage we are doing by blindly holding on to this business as usual model long beyond the point of no return.
And to return to the case at hand; an Obama vote is a personal endorsement of business as usual pragmatism. He will not act to revolutionise our approach to the world. And that is what is needed.
You talk of a revolution needing mass support. Historically speaking, that's a long way from accurate. We need a revolution; I'd like it to be peaceful, but either way it's needed. Enthusiastic support of a business-as-usual corporate politician may well be pragmatic, but it is not what we need.
And again let me stress that this is just how I view the world. I believe that my opinions are worth sharing, but I have never tried to impose them on anyone. I hope they might influence people of course, but I leave that choice to them.
Mind you, my statement about 'revolution' is also my honest view. Perhaps a new way of thinking needs to be imposed. I'll let you know when I've worked out how... then we can debate the ethics of whether or not it should be done ;-)
|
