I guess I’ve been stuck on this idea for way too long. I thought I’d put pictures to it. Why not?
This is how we seem to believe that politics is. In one picture. I didn’t take much time. I scribbled onto some graph paper because I always have graph paper.
There’s only two ways of thinking. You’re either “right” or “left” and there’s no other way to think about this. And if we compare how people think today to how they thought when David Koch was running as a Libertarian in 1980, we can argue we (as a nation) have moved to the “right” over the years.
As I’ve laid out in the past, David Koch and the Libertarians had ideas which were too far fetched back when Reagan won the Presidency. So Koch infiltrated the Republican Party with money and drove the discussion the way he wanted it to go.
The fact is that all Koch really cared about was money. Mostly taxes. See, he didn’t want to pay any and was willing to spend any amount of money in order to save taxes.
We’ve allowed this to happen. We’ve allowed our system to be purchased like it was on the front lawn of somebody’s house. Used Democracy for sale.
The point is that David Koch wasn’t really a Republican.
I believe the true way of thinking of the political spectrum is represented more in this crude drawing.
This graph is no to scale. I haven’t taken a poll. I haven’t asked. I just know that Clinton and Trump don’t stand that far apart.
By adding a y axis to the graph, we can see that people should be thinking about politics on more than one level. The Kochs, by the way, would be on the right hemisphere of the graph, but slightly above the line.
People are generally not one issue candidates. Almost all Libertarians I’ve talked to have to decide between social issues or economic. They almost all vote Republican because money rules the discussion for them.
But they are completely giving up on social change. They have been forced to not worry about it in order to get tax breaks while the deficit continues to increase. Libertarians cannot be voted in.
I find it increasingly disappointing that the discussion is like this.
Here’s the thing, we like to make our politicians linear.
Me against you.
Us against them.
Red vs. Blue.
Black and white.
But we are doing ourselves a disservice, because we should really be discussing more on issues than we do. The only way to get the issues out there is to invite more ideas. To openly engage others’ opinions and allow them to have a voice.
We shouldn’t be discussing who is more progressive than the other or who lines up better with a certain way of thinking. We should be allowed to get many more opinions and a higher level of discussion than we have.
When we allow the discussion to become linear, we create an environment where the next discussion becomes this.
In which the two candidates try to prove they are less evil than the other.
That’s how I picture it. As if it’s measurable.
I like things to be measurable.
The real problem is once we accept that our only choices are both evil, we may as well roll dice and randomly select the leaders of our nation. Because the only people who will win are the wealthy and the ruling class.