11-1-04

Today is the day before the election and the whole world holds its breath. That's right, America. The rest of the world watches everything we do. Even more so than we do, sadly to say. Whole financial markets rise and fall on the word of our most influential policymakers.

I'm a politics junkie, not by choice, but because I am a pervert. I am fascinated by all things ugly and horrible. But I am not alone. Ever since the 2000 election debacle, and especially since 9/11/01 we've all become painfully aware of politics. And I've noticed something lately which I've always known, but which I've never been able to put my finger on. It has to do with our perceptions of reality, something which most people assume is the turf of philosophy professors, but which has immediate and profound ramifications for all of our lives.

Politics is, in essence, philosophy in action. It is the physical manifestation of what we belive about how humans should interact. And what you believe is an extension of your perception of reality. So I was intrigued when I read about a study performed by a collaboration between University of Maryland's Programme on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) and Knowledge Networks, a California-based polling firm. This survey has confirmed my nagging feeling that "...Bush supporters and Kerry supporters have profoundly different perceptions of reality...". Read the report here.

This idea is examined at length in Ron Suskind's recent New York Times article, entitled "Without a Doubt". He refers to an ideological battle being waged "between modernists and fundamentalists, pragmatists and true believers, reason and religion". This schism in human philosophy has been raging since Natural Philosophy evolved into Science, beginning with the Rennaisance. It is a decision- a choice between empiricism and faith. Here in America today, we see the split between the faith-based community and the reality-based community, as evidenced by the fact that most scientific communities abhor the Bush administration and most church communities adore the Bush Administration. Read Suskind's devastating article here.

In a nation ostensibly run by the rule of law, it's fascinating that we can't just simply vote, count the votes, and whoever get the most wins. There is the issue of what kind of voting machines to use, and especially who's writing the code (for reference on this terribly important subject, go to Black Box Voting).

There is also the issue of how to reach the mind-numb American public, mainly through the use of advertising, a politically connected, multi-billion dollar industry. The cost of advertising gives the win to the candidate with the most money, and by extension, the industry itself. The Center for Public Integrity has plenty of information about that here.

But even after the votes are counted, America's public arena becomes a gladiator event as thousands of lawyers line up to clog the system with legal challenges. John Dean- former counsel to President Nixon- has recently written an article detailing how the election game is played and what each side is willing to do to win. In the 2000 election, the democrats ceded a very close election in order to maintain the credibility of the system that both sides require in order to maintain power. That will not happen this time. A constitutional crisis looms. I highly suggest that you read the full article here.

Some time between the Presidential election on Nov. 2 and the Iraqi election on Jan. 1st, it is assumed by those in the know that there will be an escalation of fighting in Iraq. The reason is that the elections cannot go forth unless rebel strongholds like Fallujah and Ramadi are retaken. Reinforcements have arrived, thanks to a back-door draft from within the DOD. Now, some fear that if re-elected, Bush will call a general draft in order to fight wars against Iran and Syria, and maybe North Korea. Bush, of course, has denied this allegation, and some spin-meisters in the news are claiming that our professional high-tech force is immune to a draft, since becoming a modern American soldier requires a great deal of training; you can't simply throw a guy in boot camp, hand him a rifle and send him to the front, not the way America fights modern wars. However, insiders at Dover Air Force Base are casting doubt on this claim. Read the scoop here.

And finally, if Michael Ruppert is correct, none of this will matter at all. A former LAPD Narcotics Detective who turned down a job with the CIA after he found out they were trafficking drugs to fund secret wars, he has since turned to the subject of Peak Oil, and has much material located at his website, www.fromthewilderness.com. However, for the 90 minute cliff notes version, I highly suggest listening to a speech he gave in Santa Cruz October 20th, 2004. It's an hour and a half, but it explains so much. If you click only one link on my webpage, let it be this one.