|"For All Your Rational Thought Needs"|
Democracy is all about Choices
Oct. 16th, 2004 @ 01:41 am
A moment I have been dreading has come to pass. I got my absentee ballot a few days ago. Which means I am going to have to vote here in a few days. I can think of few things more depressing than this. When I started voting (a mere four years ago) I promised myself that I would never vote against. I would never throw my vote away on some looser because I hated some other looser more. And yet, here we are. Should I vote for Mr. “I have a plan” because I really don’t like Mr. “Don’t look at me, look at him, HIM!” Or do I fulfill my promise to myself? It seems a sad state of affairs when in only my second presidential election I am already so disgusted with the process that I have started considering voting against. If only we could cast a negative vote. We should be able to give a +1 or a -1, that is fairer, I think. I just can’t get behind Kerry. He is a ticket for business as usual. The fact is most of his “plans” are the same plans as the Bush administration, or a Bush Light version. That doesn’t exactly make me want to jump on board the Kerry-express. At the same time, Bush has to go. But I think he will get ousted this time around. So what is a guy to do? Do I go with my ideals and my party and vote Cobb (Green Party)? I have a great deal of respect for Cobb and the Libertarian candidate Bladnarik, who together crossed the police line in the second debate in an attempt to debate the main stream candidates. Cobb and Bladnarik were arrested. They believe in what they are saying, they believe in what they are doing. They are not trying to play to the middle or do business as usual. We live in a representative democracy: that means I should pick people that represent me. Other than the good hair, Kerry does NOT represent me. Why should I vote for him? Because Bush doesn’t represent me either? Does that make sense? Vote for one guy who doesn’t represent your ideals because there is this other guy that also doesn’t represent you either. Cobb represents my views and I would be proud to have him in office. He represents me, shouldn’t he get my vote if I truly believe in the system? But that is all on the theoretical level, the fact is my nation and my world are worse off now than they were when Bush took office. I have a hard time thinking that the real president (Al Gore) would have done any better, but I doubt he could have done worse. Do I think Kerry can fix things? Of course not, he is part of the problem not the solution. But, do I think Bush could make things a lot worse? Yes, because he is a bigger part of the problem. Do I think Kerry could make things worse? He undoubtedly will, but his potential to make things worse is much less than Bush’s potential to make things worse. So the right thing to do is vote for Cobb, but the practical thing to do is vote for Kerry. This is the problem I toil under. Over the weekend I have to vote. I will listen to the last debate desperately hoping, beyond reason, that Kerry will say something, ANYTHING, that will make me support him and not his current handlers, but I know it will not happen. I know that come Sunday night I will have to sit at my desk and stare at my empty ballot. I will have to decide whether to break the promises I have made and go against the very ideology I live by, or if I should aim for the lesser of two evils. But beyond all of that, no matter how I vote, for Cobb or Kerry, part of me will always know I have made the wrong choice. And Democracy is all about choices.
|Date:||October 15th, 2004 10:07 am (UTC)|| |
Send a message
You gotta go back to your roots, man. Let physics lead the way. Here I propose an utterly ridiculous, but ultimately amussing model system:
Let Bu, Ba, K, C, N, and be arbitrary wavefunctions in linear vector space representing each of the five candidates you have mentioned. By definition, they are orthogonal, since no two can be president at the same time and thus their wavefunctions do not overlap.
Next, one must evaluate their expectation values and eigenvalues using the presidential operator, P. This gives you the weighted average value of their presidency and the real, observable value of their presidency as a function of time, which allows you to predict their progression for present < t < present + 4 years. Integrating over the wavefunction with those limits gives you the total value of their four-year term.
Multiply that by how much each of their probability density distributions lie within your political sphere (i.e. a number between 0 and 1) and you've got your answer -- maximum value of presidency and largest amount of political density that lies within your own political radius.
|Top of Page
||Powered by LiveJournal.com|