trippyvidz

sereneeeee

Serene the waves break tenderly,
Sloshing softly on the shore,
A great nostalgia thus implored
For each one broken but before,
And yet an eager air upbeat
Seeks to with the fresh waves meet
And in their solace, glowing, greet,
The impassioned heart of life complete,
Profound its liberating beat,
Singing tranquility soft and sweet.


Unfurling from the clouds this ray
Of dawning light sinks to my flesh,
Opening my eyes like gates,
To wondrous visions blessed.

The passing of the earth before me,
Waves ebbing a waning shore,
Does pour into my heart serene
The fluid hues of light adored,
Beaming brightly as Selene,
By one golden sheen absorbed.

why america needs multi-party political system

The current U.S. political system is sinking deep into an intolerable dysfunctionality. Our two political parties, the Democrats and the Republicans, have proved too many times their utter inability to reach solutions for our country’s most glaring problems. Political debate between the two has simply lost its effectiveness, which has been replaced by empty but inflammatory rhetoric. A prime example is the debate over abortion, in which both sides for and against abortion dare not listen at all to the other, certain they each have the higher moral ground and eager to demonize their opponents. A huge part of this unwillingness to listen and thus inability to reach a solution appears to be caused by an enormous distrust. The two parties deeply distrust each other, and while it may be vital to stand one’s ground and fight for what is right, it is too frequently obvious that the right solution cannot be fathomed without acknowledging and fully comprehending the other side of the argument. To ignore the other side is to deny that it is valid, and while certainly a falsehood can be logically declared to be so when the truth is known, some analyzing has to be done to realize this, the logic behind each side must be compared, and this is what immediate denial of possible validity fails to do, so that even when the logic of two opposing views may coexist or even function together, or if one view is indeed completely wrong, a working solution cannot be reached. The truthful premises must be fully distinguished and reason must be used to analyze what arguments logically follow the absolute premises. If an opposing view is neglected, it cannot be reasoned as being valid or not, and in today’s political system, immediate denial of the opposition has become ingrained in both sides on so many of the biggest issues due to distrust, so that truth is too blurred to be a factor. And if upon analyzation both sides of an issue prove valid, then it follows simply that they both must be factors of the solution. But is this impossible to do politically because of the nature of politics? If everyone was so eager to ascertain the truth and reach solutions, solutions could easily be reached. But not everyone is so eager nor informed sufficiently to analyze all our issues (whether due to distrust or, more frequently, failing to do the research required to be informed which is most often caused by the somewhat valid sense of uselessness in an individual's capacity to affect politics), which is mainly why politicians rendered incapable of making working solutions themselves are elected. Because politicians can only hold office with the people’s consent, and the people cannot or do not analyze what the people they are voting for are truly standing for, politicians must appeal to these people by taking stands on issues which are not necessarily logical positions, merely popular positions. Politics is popularity and popular ideas are not always the best., but these politicians must hold true to their campaigns to stay in office, and must stand steadfastly against their opposition, which has over time bred this distrust. I propose that the birth of a third major political party has great potential to decrease this distrust. If there were a third major political party, the solution making would no longer be a bipolar win-lose scenario, but a multi-sided debate in which politicians would be more willing to and capable of reaching solutions. Instead of two parties entering a deadlock, a multi-party system would ensure more effective checks and balances on the political parties much like the checks and balances successfully enacted in the three parts of the entire government, the legislative, executive, and judicial branches, which would be unsuccessful if any of its two parts combined, which could easily produce the deadlocks and lack of solutions that our current two-party political system is restricted to producing.

The ideology of this third party would be a more liberal version of the democrats, allowing for a better place for votes to go from the lower class which without doubt has the most strain on its basic right granted by the social contract to consent to be governed how it is because it is simply not represented enough. I claim that the lowest class is not as protected by the social contract as they rightfully should be nor as much as anyone else in America is because they are powerless to change their dismal position is society. They are not truly granted the right to consent to be governed they way they are, because if they were granted this right, they would not be trapped in their miserable positions. Their right to negotiate or to give their input is virtually nonexistent, because even though they may be able to vote, what can voting accomplish when the only candidates they can vote for are not addressing all of what they need to be addressed? How can a political system based on the consent of the governed govern justly or even reasonably while omitting the most desperate needs of so many people? A third party aimed at these currently overlooked but absolutely essential needs would give the lower class the advantage it justly deserves.

The powerless position of the lowest classes is most evident when looking at their income, which is unfairly low, too low to even live off of. Fox news may give its pathetic attempt to disprove this fact, stating that the majority of the “lower class” owns refrigerators, but I must plead that a refrigerator is one thing and the unnecessary burden of stress over how these people are to pay for the food to go in it is another. Of course America is not a third world country and obviously lower class Americans are not starving Ethiopians. However, they are the Americans most deprived of the right to consent to be governed, and it is in the fabric of the Constitution to protect equally this vital right of all, and it is in the nature of the government’s basis to solve the country’s most dire problems, and the lowly state of these Americans protrudes grotesquely when it is taken into consideration how easily this unnecessary suffering could be abolished. Taxes on the wealthiest Americans during the last eight years has dropped due to the Bush tax cuts to thirty-five percent, a cut which has disproportionately favored wealthy Americans and has been a major factor in the government’s now huge debt and the recent economic recession, or depression as labeled by many, which has hit hardest the lowest class. The tax rate on the richest Americans in the nineteen fifties, a whopping ninety percent, allowed for the booming economy and for nearly all Americans to be a part of a very well-off middle class. But the dominating republicans of today, having the power of their money translated into unfair political power, would not let such a tax rate pass over their dead, rotting bodies. However, to mention fox news again, they have led too many Americans into believing that the only unfair taxes today are those not paid. Sadly for this translucent deceit is the fact that the Americans who don’t pay taxes are only those who cannot due mainly to unemployment which has been caused by the bad economy which has been caused mostly by tax cuts on the richest. Because of the lower class’ lack of political power, their arguments against regressive tax rates and excessive tax cuts for the richest can fall only on deaf ears. I am not proposing communism here, merely the deserved and reasonable representation of the people who need it most.

dad and bro - dream

In a dream I sat in calm, quiet gloom,

nearly startled to hear my brother say

from behind a door into my bedroom

in such a maliciously mocking way

our father was dead, he'd killed him today,

sent him to the fate for which he was doomed.

Not a second passed for my weary eyes

to analyze yet a word he'd spoken,

not a second yet for any my cries,

before the door's hinges were then broken.

He had gleefully thrown open the door,

letting our father's body topple in,

and he told me, "Look now, he's dead for sure!

There'll be no more of that stupid grin!"

And I saw the severed back of his head

bloody and perverse, sliding to my feet,

and I sat transfixed and trembling with dread

too petrified to rise now from my seat.

But my mad brother called to me again,

And I rose slowly, silently, softly

supressing fearful screams crying hotly,

and came to my brother calmly again.

He said nothing else of what he had done,

but insisted I weep on his shoulder,

to rid myself of the mourning that'd come,

which I must hide, and simply grow colder.

A phone ring woke me from my sad nightmare,

and I answered to hear my brother speak,

informing me he'd drive me home today,

because our father was feeling too weak.