Strikethrough

Just so we’re clear I don’t think I have created a new way of thinking with this Clearing The Premises blog.  In fact, if anything, it’s the opposite.

I’m just trying to put my own spin on a mindset that I know is shared by others – if I thought I was the only one who thought that way, sure there would be no point in writing about it because you’d all think I was a candidate for the funny farm.

There was even an example of it in the plot line of the Lego Movie for crying out loud!  But I won’t give you any spoilers…

Anyway…let me try a different way of explaining why this site is called CTP.

We discuss “politics” way too much.  What we should be discussing is “government”.  In other words, less about the “who” and more about the “how”.

But the media is more about the conflict.  And trust me, I’m not one of those who loves to have a bash at the media…by bashing them we in turn bash the public that feeds on what they produce.

So when it comes to “politics” the discussions are almost exclusively run through this prism :

LEFT V RIGHT

I believe everything about that is wrong – the “Left”, the “Right” and even the “V”.  Allow me to challenge them one by one.

1. RIGHT RICH : By observing conservative election strategies over the years, it is clear they are never interested in winning everyone’s votes.  They just want enough votes to get elected.  Anything from the mid-to-high 40s in terms of percentage is considered a decent return for them, so they do what they can to either buy votes or keep people away from the polls altogether.

But by calling them the “right”, we afford them half of the “space”, when in fact if you take away all the people who vote for them out of loyalty, fear or whatever reason, you actually get an extremely small percentage, which the Occupy Wall Street movement estimated as 1% but I actually think is a lot lower.  So the way I see it, the Left/Right model is way, way off base.

For me the ideal name to rebrand them with is “establishment” because it demonstrates how they got their power by establishing themselves.  Thing is though, that word is way too clunky.  So let’s just call em “rich” – much more media-savvy name don’t you think?

2. LEFT  US : So we’ve rebranded the right, what’s left? (see what I did there) What’s left is US.  I had a bit of a struggle with the fact that US could be mistaken for United States, but then I realised that would be a good exercise for my fellow Americans in that they need to realise that there’s more to “us” than what’s within their own borders.  And through proper education, everyone can learn the proper definition of US.

3. V > :  And when I say “everyone can learn the proper definition of US”, I mean EVERYONE.  That INCLUDES the “Rich”.  There’s a lot of animosity towards the establishment and in many cases it is understandable.  But we need to find a way to take the conflict out of it if there is ever to be a meaningful path forward.  The Rich rule by fear but I believe that is partly because they themselves fear the consequences if they let go of their power.  Maybe, just maybe the US can show them those consequences won’t be so bad. 

All we have to do is turn that V on it’s side, so from LEFT V RIGHT we go to this way of looking at the priorities of government…

US > RICH

Simple, ain’t it?  Now I have world peace sorted out, what’s next? Ah yes, how Ireland can win the Six Nations 😉  JLP