Two sides of the same coin

Submitted by Sheerahkahn (United States), Nov 26, 2007 at 18:59

...I find the premise of the book to be...interesting...perhaps bold, but truth and boldness are not the same thing. neither is interesting and truth. Watching the two main political ideologues yell at each other over this long period of time, I think there are layers of motivations within the two camps, and as you peel away these layers you will find that the two groups, liberals and.../ahem...the "new conservatives" are really two sides of the same coin. Both want a strong unified government, both want a dedicated/fawning electorate, and the one thing that both want is a dependent electorate on their "wise governance."

To put as fine a point on the topic as possible, it is evident with the way the current policies of both parties having evolved from the halcyon days of "Camelot's" call for "ask not what you're country can do for you, but what you can do for your country" is that both parties feel that the only true way to govern is to govern with as much power as one can grab.

Hence, why our Congress is little more than a lickspittle to the wishes of the White House, and the Justice bench little more than a rubber stamp to the party bosses. And I think it's high time all of us come to grips with the simple, basic fact that we are no longer a Republic, we are an Empire...granted, a failed Empire due to our distaste for going Roman on our enemies, but that does not change our evolving political structure.

We are an Empire, and as an Empire our government will become more and more...absolutist in it's structure, regardless of political philosophy/label/affiliation because no one has rejected the underlying motivational premise that both our current political parties have embraced: To lead, one must rule, and to rule one must rule absolutely, and to rule absolutely, one must bend the will of those to be ruled to their own.

The problems of the United States political system does not stem from the end result of a bullet hitting a President in the 60's. The problem comes when people want something bad enough to do anything for it...some people are attracted to money, some attracted to fame, but there are some who are attracted to power...raw, untamed power, and nothing goes to the head faster than attaining the office of the President...and now imagine being the man, or woman sitting in that seat...of course, no man ever got to that seat by himself...And like Rome, there are always the patron's who need to be placated.

The premise is interesting, but then so is Lord of the Rings.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".