Magnifisyncopathological

Message from John Edwards, Director of the Center on Poverty, Work and Opportunity:

Poverty is one of the great issues of our time. It cuts to the heart of America's great promise: that anyone who works hard and plays by the rules will have the opportunity to build a better life for themselves and their family.

One of the things that most irritates me about politicians and so many pundits is when they refer to America as a whole, personifying it as some singular entity that acts and thinks.

It's laughable when Mr. Edwards says America promises something. No, "it" didn't.

But, Drizz, what about the outcome of a democratic government process?

When a majority of eligible individuals (picked by a majority of eligible citizens who bothered to vote) in the House and a majority of eligible individuals (picked by a majority of eligible citizens who bothered to vote) in the Senate agree to pass a bill that first had to "leave committee" (each consisting of appointees and rife with political favoritism) to be "reconciled" (code for watered-down-to-general-acceptability) in order for one eligible individual (picked by a majority of eligible citizens who bothered to vote) to sign and execute, does that constitute the unanimity so often implied in political rhetoric? And that's assuming these Representatives even bothered to create legislation for which their constituents asked!

*laugh*

That isn't America speaking. That is the light breeze of a once stiff wind, forced through innumerable filters, channeled through miles of leaky conduit, and diverted around a growing number of dead-ends and loop-backs. The whole premise is fraudulent; political theater utilized to justify some truly abhorrent shit. Furthermore, there's nothing morally apodictic about that wind in the first place. Quite the contrary. Far more often than not, the pure desires expressed in the votes that lead to those who get placed into power are the desires to control others.

Millions of votes not only for taxation, but for increased taxation. Millions of votes not merely for the current regulatory scheme, but for regulation to the point private ownership loses its meaning. Millions of votes not just to hopelessly keep the central power status quo, but to further entrench it.

Back to Mr. Edwards:

It may seem like an impossible goal to end poverty, but that's what the skeptics said about all of the other great challenges we've faced as a nation. If we can put a man on the moon, conquer polio, and put libraries of information on a chip, we can end poverty for those who want to work for a better life.

Meanwhile, in reality, a nontrivial percent of his audience wasn't even alive or conceptually conscious during all these group-gooey "we" moments. Of those that were, certainly some weren't earning enough income to attract the hot hand of the IRS, thereby separating them fiscally from these projects; did they "contribute"? And let's not forget those who disagreed, who didn't want to have their earnings spent on those projects.

This rhetorical collectivization just bugs the hell out of me.

AND IT'S EVERYWHERE.