Okay, some of what I'm going to say is, I think, pretty objective, if it's understood to refer to the situation in America. Other bits of it will indulge my particular political bias. Oh, well; not like the rest of the posts here are any more objective...

Consider that, along with the illusion of having only two choices, the mass media also pretty much sponsors the illusion that there is only one decision that matters: who gets the presidency. And that the two political parties each stand for something simple and definable. And, for that matter, that your only choices for finding out about such things are NBC or CBS, or FOX, etc.

In fact, none of this is true. You know darned well there are more than two guys running for president, and you know you can get your news without kneeling before the Television Gods.

But in truth, you know too that there are more positions being contested than the presidency. Most of us can, if we choose, at least influence who gets into our state House and how they vote. Hell, lots of these seats go uncontested... and these are the people who have to vote on things like UCITA.

Furthermore, the very idea of a political party is kind of a joke. You don't seriously believe there's any cohesion amongst either party, do you? Go to some local political function, and tell me that what you saw there looked more like a giant thumb than a zoo where all the cages got left open. Political parties are vehicles for individuals to pursue their political goals, nothing more.

Interestingly, this is why they're effective. A unified group is almost inevitably too small; they provide no opportunities to make mutually beneficial alliances with people who, in part, disagree with you.

Anyway don't believe the centralization scam. And don't vote for a third party. Don't vote for any party. Vote for a person.

So much for objectivity. Now a word from Petruchio.

Zarathustra: "that giant red, white and blue star spangled thumb that continues so relentlessly to snuff any real change"

And what change would that be? Where do we all want to go together? I maintain that there can hardly be a better point of consensus reached than right where we are now.

The key word being, "consensus". Why do we have to go anywhere together? Really, we don't. It's all part of that simplistic illusion, the product of the 20th Century's mass media, mass production, mass education and mass consumption.

I wish to see the system decentralized. This is, to a great extent, possible. The internet has already gone a long way towards setting us free, and tools to preserve our freedom (such as it is), like strong crypto, are in our hands. Progress can be made both within the political arena, and by taking the important issues outside the political arena.

TIMTOWTDI, in life as in code. I don't want to live by consensus... I want to be left alone.