RNK
20th April 2007, 03:03
A lot is made of the fact that Cuba is a "one-party system". It is a rather shallow accusation which fails to take into account other realities, and is basically a fear-mongering propaganda technique to make the average westerner look at Cuba as if there were absolutely no political choice, as if voters are given ballots with only a single name on them (which, if this were the case, should cause many to wonder why Cuba has a voter turnout of over 90%).
Anyway, I'm sure a lot of you OI kiddies are very defensive of your "democratic system", but I have to ask you... do you really believe that political parties are actually democratic?
Consider it this way. Since the mid-terms last year a lot of "buzz" started going around (although it died out quickly) that, on average, it costs $1,000,000 to run (and have a good chance of succeeding) for Governorship; and $6,000,000 to become a Senator. These costs include maintaining the county party headquarters, campaign TV and radio ads, internet campaigning, and touring, and all of that nice stuff. Where do these guys get this cash?
Well, a lot of them are already rich as pigs, and naturally, have many rich friends who donate a lot of money. This begs the question... if politics are so reliant on spending money on comprehensive election campaigns, how exactly is anyone who isn't a millionaire supposed to compete? Can anyone on this board honestly have any chance in hell of running for a government office?
Anyway this is about Political Parties.. what are they? Well, the most simple version is that they are simply groups of like-minded politicians who have banded together and pooled their financial and social resources to help one another out. But how is this democratic? Why do we need parties at all? First of all, it kinda forces anyone interested in politics to "pick an already existing side" to join and "fight for". It forces them to comply to the political line of party that already exists (and, naturally, at the top of every party is the party leader, who eventually becomes President -- how is this democratic?)
Secondly, it monopolizes the "political market", in a way. In this day and age, political success is almost entirely reliant upon the ability of a candidate to use television, radio, internet and touring to get his face out there and get elected. Hence the hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on election campaigns. This kind of spending, particularly when you extend it nationally, is impossible for anyone not in a Party. You'll never see an independant President.
So why not simply abolish political parties altogether? And campaign spending? Why can't candidates be elected by virtue of actually engaging his communities? During election campaigns, get the candidates -- all candidates -- together every weekend for a massive debate held in the largest public building in the county (one of the most atrocious examples of political monopoly is the fact that public debates are usually only ever hosted by some media or other organization, and almost always there are candidates who are not invited -- how is that democratic?), allow public interaction, and let them go at it. No TV campaigns, no money spent (although in this day and age any lunatic can start a blog and run his own personal internet campaign for his favorite candidate), all campaign tours paid for by the state.
What's the problem with this?
Anyway, I'm sure a lot of you OI kiddies are very defensive of your "democratic system", but I have to ask you... do you really believe that political parties are actually democratic?
Consider it this way. Since the mid-terms last year a lot of "buzz" started going around (although it died out quickly) that, on average, it costs $1,000,000 to run (and have a good chance of succeeding) for Governorship; and $6,000,000 to become a Senator. These costs include maintaining the county party headquarters, campaign TV and radio ads, internet campaigning, and touring, and all of that nice stuff. Where do these guys get this cash?
Well, a lot of them are already rich as pigs, and naturally, have many rich friends who donate a lot of money. This begs the question... if politics are so reliant on spending money on comprehensive election campaigns, how exactly is anyone who isn't a millionaire supposed to compete? Can anyone on this board honestly have any chance in hell of running for a government office?
Anyway this is about Political Parties.. what are they? Well, the most simple version is that they are simply groups of like-minded politicians who have banded together and pooled their financial and social resources to help one another out. But how is this democratic? Why do we need parties at all? First of all, it kinda forces anyone interested in politics to "pick an already existing side" to join and "fight for". It forces them to comply to the political line of party that already exists (and, naturally, at the top of every party is the party leader, who eventually becomes President -- how is this democratic?)
Secondly, it monopolizes the "political market", in a way. In this day and age, political success is almost entirely reliant upon the ability of a candidate to use television, radio, internet and touring to get his face out there and get elected. Hence the hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on election campaigns. This kind of spending, particularly when you extend it nationally, is impossible for anyone not in a Party. You'll never see an independant President.
So why not simply abolish political parties altogether? And campaign spending? Why can't candidates be elected by virtue of actually engaging his communities? During election campaigns, get the candidates -- all candidates -- together every weekend for a massive debate held in the largest public building in the county (one of the most atrocious examples of political monopoly is the fact that public debates are usually only ever hosted by some media or other organization, and almost always there are candidates who are not invited -- how is that democratic?), allow public interaction, and let them go at it. No TV campaigns, no money spent (although in this day and age any lunatic can start a blog and run his own personal internet campaign for his favorite candidate), all campaign tours paid for by the state.
What's the problem with this?