How easy it is to make people believe a lie, and how hard it is to undo that work again! (Mark Twain)
Crips or Bloods (The Athena Paradox)
Why only two parties? There’s a reason, and that reason is systemic, and stems from the workings of financial power. Like Crips and Bloods, there’s only two choices, and each mirrors the other.
One of my favorite books was written in 1965 by Jacques Ellul, and called “Propaganda”. I have never met another person who has read it, or will read it. Perhaps it is the name – “Propaganda” calls up images of Korean indoctrination camps, Soviet commissars and Mao’s Great Leap Forward.
Ellul wrote on a very high level, detached from the power centers, and so described public opinion management not just in the totalitarian centers, but also in the democracies of that time. Jacques Ellul (1912-1994)The U.S. was not exempted form his analysis, and “United States propaganda” was just another type alongside French, Soviet, Chinese, Vietnamese, and others. Further, Ellul was not a man given to emotional outbursts about human nature or democratic governance. He even thought that propaganda was inevitable in societies using mass communication methods, and so ought to be constrained to serve our broader interests.
This did not sit well with American elites, who would not even acknowledge propaganda’s existence on this side of the pond. It was only something that happened beyond the Iron Curtain. The idea too that it could serve egalitarian purposes must have chafed.
One of Ellul’s observations was that we suffer from illusions, one of which is “progress.” We buy electric razors because they are “better” than the old blades. They are not, but they are newer, and thus represent progress. In fact, he said, progress doesn’t really exist even as technology improves. One face of propaganda ... So I assume, if he is right, that our current cloud computing web-based society is essentailly no different than the one he wrote about in the early 1960’s. Then, as now, we were a two-party state, and most people thought that was the normal state of affairs.
Ergo:
Of course, the political parties already have the role of adjusting public opinion to that of the government. Numerous studies have shown that political parties often do not agree with that opinion, that the voters – and even party members – frequently do not know their parties’ doctrines, ... and anotherand that people belong to parties for reasons other than ideological ones. But the parties channel free-floating opinion into existing formulas, polarizing it on opposites that do not necessarily correspond to the original tenets of such opinion. Because parties are so rigid, because they deal with only part of any question, and because they are purely politically motivated, they distort public opinion and prevent it from forming naturally.
Two parties then existed, and people cling to them because they know no other way. They don’t even represent our opinions.
A party or a bloc of parties as powerful as a would-be runaway party starts big propaganda before it is pushed to the wall. This is the case in the United States, and might be in France if the regrouping of the Right should become stabilized. In that situation one would necessarily have, for financial reasons, a democracy reduced to two parties, it being inconceivable that a larger number of parties would have sufficient means to make such propaganda. This would lead to a bipartite structure, not for reasons of doctrine or tradition, but for technical propaganda reasons. This implies the exclusion of new parties in the future. Not only are secondary parties progressively eliminated, but it becomes impossible to organize new political groups with any chance at all of making them heard. … On the other hand, such a small group would need, from the beginning, a great deal of money, many members, and great power. Under such conditions, a new party could only be born as Athena emerging fully grown from Zeus’ forehead.
There were three candidates. Only one was sane. Ross Perot’s American Independence Party was such a manifestation of Athena, as he had millions to invest and a strong message that resonated well. Perot was crushed, of course, and to this day if asked, most people will offer up some version of “he was on target, but crazy.”
Ross Perot is not crazy. That people think he was is the power of propaganda. Since his time, our two parties have fixed the system so that no future Perot will ever upset them as the one of the 1990’s did.
Ralph Nader’s futile attempts in 2000 through 2008 prove Ellul’s point. It will never happen. There isn’t enough money to overcome the big two. So, no surprise, Nader’s latest book is called “Only the Super Rich Can Save Us.” He too has realized the Athena paradox.
What to do? That’s a question often asked. Over at 4&20 over the weekend, they wrestled with immigration … what to do? The author of the post is a Democrat, and had harsh words for Republicans, who are not ‘offering solutions’ to that problem.
We now have 11.5 million illegals here. Most are here due to Bill Clinton’s NAFTA, also supported by the ‘other’ party. They are not going anywhere. We need to melt them in with us, bring them under our laws, and adapt. But bringing them under our laws would not be enough, as our laws are designed to thwart popular organizations. The illegals have to be blended into the current propaganda structure, and so must be shut out until they adapt. So the two parties are merely fighting for the votes of the Hispanic population while not doing anything concrete about the ‘problem.’
There is no solution to be had, or alternately, the ‘solution’ to the ‘problem’ of immigration is, like so much else, an illusory goal. There is no electric razor that will fix that problem.
And so that’s the way it is in the bipartite state. We must seek solutions that cannot be had until we break from the two parties, and the two parties are too powerful to break.
California just voted to limit the November ballot to the top two candidates who poll the most votes in June. Prop. 14 was put on the ballot by the 2009 legislature. This effectively ends third-party and independent candidates chances of ever again appearing on the November ballot. The icing on the cake is that write-in votes can no longer be counted either. Checkmate. “So goes California…”
Texas Democrats recently sued in state court to remove the Green Party from the ballot. So, it’s not personal. Democrats hate Nader, and all alternative politics that’s not authoritarian-neoliberal.
When propaganda isn’t enough, sue, or write unconstitutional laws to keep the disgruntled masses at bay.
So, only through half your post, I am required to respond.
Whereas I mostly agree with Ellul (or your interpretation of him, since I -regrettably- have not read this work) about Progress – I would argue that the Web is different in a fundamental way.
The content available on the Web -such as blogging- is changing the landscape of communication – but it is not the Progress – it is a consequence of Progress.
The Progress created by the Web is due to the avoidance of the gatekeepers.
One thing you can say about the Elite – they are very stupid. Very violent, yes – but very stupid. (It is a parallelism that stupid people tend to use violence as their primary tool of problem solving).
The Internet simply confused them. They did not know what it meant, nor its power and they ignored it.
There was the beat generation, the underground press, the Alternative Press, the New Left. There were no blockades to those movements. The power is the grip of mass media. I have access to the Internet. I write stuff you don’t read elsewhere. Most people who come here get quizzical looks and don’t come back. Nothings fits, and so nothing penetrates.
Those movements were in the system and were the counter balanced.
The New Left faced off against the New Right.
The Beat Generation faced off against the Christian Right.
The Alternative Press vs. the Mainstream.
The Internet is not in the system – it is beyond the system (by design). The Elite missed this because it was provisioned by their own and it made a them a lot of money.
Yes, the visions of great wealth dazzle their eyes, too! 🙂 And as such, created the most powerful disruptor of their own systems by their own hand!
As you know, I have often argued about the futility of changing the system (such as by “voting”). Most of my arguments came from the basics of all heuristic systems in the Universe,that is, for such a system to exist, there must exist methods of negative feedback to eliminate processes that would alter or disrupt the system.
Now, you’ve added another excellent argument and description to my defense.
Politics is no different from other heuristic systems. A successful political system (based not on its works but its longevity) must have massive negative feedbacks that maintain systemic stability of that system.
Further, the longer the system exists, the more negative feedbacks are incorporated – thus, enhancing the resistance to systemic change. In politics, this always leads to a dictatorial tyranny – a system where the resistance to change is enforced with the maximum of political violence.
Thus, a different strategy that disrupts the roots of a system is the only method to change the system.
A solution is yet to present itself it a solution is to be had. It could be like a child’s kaliedoscope where all of the particles realign after some disruption into a pattern that is different, and yet not.
There has been change, maybe “progress,” over centuries in that we are still doing everything we did back then, but no longer in the open. We still have slaves, colonies still export their wealth to us, we torture, attack, murder infidels, and openly hate certain sects and races, currently Muslims.
But we are mostly safe in our beds, unless currently under military attack by some foreign power. We mostly think about our daily lives, our kids, our savings and health.
Regarding the Internet, I see some steam released via blogs. The Battle of Seattle can be traced to the net, but no such uprising has succeeded since. Neutrality is threatened via Verizon and Cisco and ATT, among others, who want control of the bottlenecks. In the meantime, Obama used the net effectively to get elected. Where is progress?
(1) AGW is a myth – it was a hypothesis, but the hypothesis has been demonstrated to be false. Holding on to a fail hypothesis creates myth and junk science.
(2) TEA party – is a political activism unequaled since Goldwater. It will not alter the system. It demonstrates that the system is in crisis.
E-signatures may become the next political frontier. Also from http://www.ballot-access.org: Utah Supreme Court OK’s E-Signatures. The Uniform Electronic Transaction Act, which established electronic signature legal procedures, is now in effect in all 50 states. Gather at will.
When the old men do the fighting, and the young men all look on.
And the young girls eat their mothers’ meat from tubes of plasticon.
Be wary, please, my gentle friends of all the skins you breed.
They have a nasty habit – they eat the hands that bleed.
Why only two parties? There’s a reason, and that reason is systemic, and stems from the workings of financial power. Like Crips and Bloods, there’s only two choices, and each mirrors the other. 
I have never met another person who has read it, or will read it. Perhaps it is the name – “Propaganda” calls up images of Korean indoctrination camps, Soviet commissars and Mao’s Great Leap Forward. 
it being inconceivable that a larger number of parties would have sufficient means to make such propaganda. This would lead to a bipartite structure, not for reasons of doctrine or tradition, but for technical propaganda reasons. This implies the exclusion of new parties in the future. Not only are secondary parties progressively eliminated, but it becomes impossible to organize new political groups with any chance at all of making them heard. … On the other hand, such a small group would need, from the beginning, a great deal of money, many members, and great power. Under such conditions, a new party could only be born as Athena emerging fully grown from Zeus’ forehead.
Ralph Nader’s futile attempts in 2000 through 2008 prove Ellul’s point. It will never happen. There isn’t enough money to overcome the big two. So, no surprise, Nader’s latest book is called “Only the Super Rich Can Save Us.” He too has realized the Athena paradox. 
Piece of Mindful 
From the July issue of Ballot Access News, http://www.ballot-access.org.
California just voted to limit the November ballot to the top two candidates who poll the most votes in June. Prop. 14 was put on the ballot by the 2009 legislature. This effectively ends third-party and independent candidates chances of ever again appearing on the November ballot. The icing on the cake is that write-in votes can no longer be counted either. Checkmate. “So goes California…”
Texas Democrats recently sued in state court to remove the Green Party from the ballot. So, it’s not personal. Democrats hate Nader, and all alternative politics that’s not authoritarian-neoliberal.
When propaganda isn’t enough, sue, or write unconstitutional laws to keep the disgruntled masses at bay.
LikeLike
So, only through half your post, I am required to respond.
Whereas I mostly agree with Ellul (or your interpretation of him, since I -regrettably- have not read this work) about Progress – I would argue that the Web is different in a fundamental way.
The content available on the Web -such as blogging- is changing the landscape of communication – but it is not the Progress – it is a consequence of Progress.
The Progress created by the Web is due to the avoidance of the gatekeepers.
One thing you can say about the Elite – they are very stupid. Very violent, yes – but very stupid. (It is a parallelism that stupid people tend to use violence as their primary tool of problem solving).
The Internet simply confused them. They did not know what it meant, nor its power and they ignored it.
Thus, we have Progress.
LikeLike
There was the beat generation, the underground press, the Alternative Press, the New Left. There were no blockades to those movements. The power is the grip of mass media. I have access to the Internet. I write stuff you don’t read elsewhere. Most people who come here get quizzical looks and don’t come back. Nothings fits, and so nothing penetrates.
Not much has changed.
LikeLike
Mark,
Never forget Isiah.
LikeLike
Mark,
Those movements were in the system and were the counter balanced.
The New Left faced off against the New Right.
The Beat Generation faced off against the Christian Right.
The Alternative Press vs. the Mainstream.
The Internet is not in the system – it is beyond the system (by design). The Elite missed this because it was provisioned by their own and it made a them a lot of money.
Yes, the visions of great wealth dazzle their eyes, too! 🙂 And as such, created the most powerful disruptor of their own systems by their own hand!
LikeLike
Mark,
As you know, I have often argued about the futility of changing the system (such as by “voting”). Most of my arguments came from the basics of all heuristic systems in the Universe,that is, for such a system to exist, there must exist methods of negative feedback to eliminate processes that would alter or disrupt the system.
Now, you’ve added another excellent argument and description to my defense.
Politics is no different from other heuristic systems. A successful political system (based not on its works but its longevity) must have massive negative feedbacks that maintain systemic stability of that system.
Further, the longer the system exists, the more negative feedbacks are incorporated – thus, enhancing the resistance to systemic change. In politics, this always leads to a dictatorial tyranny – a system where the resistance to change is enforced with the maximum of political violence.
Thus, a different strategy that disrupts the roots of a system is the only method to change the system.
Time for you to join the Black Flag, not? 🙂
LikeLike
A solution is yet to present itself it a solution is to be had. It could be like a child’s kaliedoscope where all of the particles realign after some disruption into a pattern that is different, and yet not.
There has been change, maybe “progress,” over centuries in that we are still doing everything we did back then, but no longer in the open. We still have slaves, colonies still export their wealth to us, we torture, attack, murder infidels, and openly hate certain sects and races, currently Muslims.
But we are mostly safe in our beds, unless currently under military attack by some foreign power. We mostly think about our daily lives, our kids, our savings and health.
Regarding the Internet, I see some steam released via blogs. The Battle of Seattle can be traced to the net, but no such uprising has succeeded since. Neutrality is threatened via Verizon and Cisco and ATT, among others, who want control of the bottlenecks. In the meantime, Obama used the net effectively to get elected. Where is progress?
LikeLike
Mark,
AGW myth was defeated by the Internet and blogs – the Elitists were stymied -at least for now.
TEA Party is another phenom of the ‘net.
Progress may be small and slow – but it exists.
LikeLike
You just stopped being interesting.
LikeLike
LoL…
…how so?
LikeLike
Each instance you cite – tea parties and defeat of science is a triumph of propaganda.
LikeLike
(1) AGW is a myth – it was a hypothesis, but the hypothesis has been demonstrated to be false. Holding on to a fail hypothesis creates myth and junk science.
(2) TEA party – is a political activism unequaled since Goldwater. It will not alter the system. It demonstrates that the system is in crisis.
LikeLike
E-signatures may become the next political frontier. Also from http://www.ballot-access.org: Utah Supreme Court OK’s E-Signatures. The Uniform Electronic Transaction Act, which established electronic signature legal procedures, is now in effect in all 50 states. Gather at will.
LikeLike
Mark,
Also remember that it usually takes a deep crisis that causes the Masses to get off their butts and do something.
Often that something is worse than the crisis that motivated them – however.
But that’s the rub. For the system to change, one must risk a worse system.
LikeLike
A Mick offering.
When the old men do the fighting, and the young men all look on.
And the young girls eat their mothers’ meat from tubes of plasticon.
Be wary, please, my gentle friends of all the skins you breed.
They have a nasty habit – they eat the hands that bleed.
LikeLike