Showing posts with label voters. Show all posts
Showing posts with label voters. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 9, 2016

Interview Across Cyber Space with Mircea Brenciu - Part II

On the question, why would people put their faith in career politicians, fighting with each other fiercely on social media, looking for purity, honesty, and perfection in a person’s character, qualities that are often lacking in the political world, Mircea Brenciu’s answer was not a surprise.

The main stream media models and shapes the news and the thinking of the voting populace based on the candidates and what platform they offer – the more socialist, the more popular. The problem arises after the election when, in the “laboratories of democracy,” the two Parliamentary chambers, behind closed doors, unabashedly vacate the will of the voting people.

There is no law that prohibits the candidates elected to migrate to other parties and to change representation to that party’s interest and ideology. “Influenced by blackmail, bribery, and other means, some representatives leave their parties under whose banner they ran for office, and join another party or political organization, thus altering the results of the general vote.” This way, a party or an alliance that was previously in a majority, becomes a minority, further eroding the will of the voters.

These Machiavellian political alliances, made before or after the election, often lack the ideological unity necessary to address the strategic, political, or economic issues of the day and thus decisions are generally made arbitrarily and not in the best interest of the population.

Parliament members are inhibited by fear that they will be arrested under real or trumped up charges and would have to defend themselves for years in a court of law and potentially serve time. Romanian politics must pass through the microscope of the bureaucracy called the National Anti-Corruption Directorate. (DNA)

In Brenciu’s opinion, the DNA is necessary but often abusive. Those who control this institution, also control the direction of national politics. For example, Brenciu added, the “infractors of the Social Democrat Party (PSD) are treated differently than the Liberal Democrat Party (PDL) of former President Traian Basescu.”

Some corrupt politicians are better protected under the law than others, escaping prison, which results in a loss of trust by the general public in the fairness and justice of government.  Using this loss of trust, other politicians shamelessly campaign under the slogan of curbing abuse, corruption, and illegality, and deliver nothing.

While the politics of corruption continue unabated, national interest is forgotten, “with a disgrace and arrogance worthy of historical traitors,” said Brenciu, and the idea of nation-state and sovereignty overlooked in the wave of internationalism coming from Brussels.  “The negotiation of individual liberty is the only politics in Romania that seem worthy of sincere, huge, and herculean efforts.”

Take for example, the development funds allocated to Romania by the European Union in Brussels. Based on passed history, under the banner of curbing corruption, the funds are draconically controlled, and those who are charged with dispersing them realize that it is almost impossible to obtain or demand bribes, and it is thus not in their interest to try very hard to allocate the funds to those who need them for development.

It is difficult to prove such financial corruption; however, why should someone complicate their lives with foreign funds from EU when there is nothing to be gained from the effort, only a lot of paperwork, hard to obtain approvals, and the long wait for funds that must be spent exactly as they were earmarked and in the given amount of time.

“For the EU bureaucrats, this would justify to view Romanians as an inferior category in the grand multinational scheme of EU wannabes.” Romania’s membership in the EU is important but their land, strategic, and economic potential are much more important to these globalist elites.

As Brenciu explained, following in the footstep of history when colonists eliminated people who already resided on the lands sought after, history has an annoying tendency to repeat itself.  He explained, “Romania must be emptied of Romanians, as they are incapable to resist the western bulldozer, and must leave the gold for the explorers who came to the Old Continent in the name of the Crown with 12 gold stars and a blue flag.”

On the question of the economic situation in Romania, following the execution of the communist dictator Nicolae Ceausescu in 1989, Brenciu had this to say.

After the Revolution of December 1989, the first government, that of Petre Roman, launched the competition which Brenciu dubbed, “Getting Rich at Any Cost,” an effort to privatize the economy.

One such method of privatization called MEBO, gave factories, industrial complexes, and economic centers to the new managers, chosen by workers’ meetings, supposedly democratic. In this new brand of “savage and primitive capitalism, devoid of any rules and regulations,” the newly appointed managers robbed everything and anything that belonged to Ceausescu’s communist state and thus became owners without any payment made to the state.  The “proletariat,” who continued to work for the new owners, received shares in this new “enterprise,” shares which they later sold to the new owners/directors who became millionaires overnight.

Brenciu clarified that the majority of the new owners/directors were former security officers and communist apparatchiks who were traitors to the communist regime, turning the anti-communist tide into their financial favor. They were opportunists, aided and abetted by a corrupt judicial system and a mentality of two wolves and a lamb deciding what’s for dinner.

The poor of yesterday, members of the proletariat, the much touted “workers,” remain the poor of today.  Many jobs have disappeared thanks to the sale of unproductive factories, piece by piece, or the sale to foreign investors who bought entire plants, whether productive or unproductive, to dismantle them or to modernize them, and thus eliminate any competition possible.

Even though Romanian economy functioned under communism with old and outdated technology, it had an industrial base. Today, Brenciu added, Romania has become an “industrial-agrarian, tourist, and service economy.” And the agricultural sector is also suffering as more arable land is left unused, while food is imported from far away.

TO BE CONTINUED

 

 

Friday, May 3, 2013

Voting Insanity, The Price of Our Enslavement

Voters on both sides of the isle complain that their chosen representatives do not perform in office according to promises made during lengthy, expensive, and exhausting campaigns. Yet they choose time and time again the same seasoned politicians who have made a life-long career in Washington, greasing the wheels of commerce, national defense, justice, and legislation. Once elected, politicians become elitist residents of the insulated bubble of the District of Columbia.

The same voters see nothing wrong with having to produce two forms of I.D. in order to receive a 10 percent military discount in a chain hardware store but become outraged when proposals are made for voters to show I.D., to prove that they are who they say they are.

A frequent voting qualifier is, “he/she does not have enough experience.” Is the lack of perceived experience not knowing how to manipulate statistics, deceive the public, how to represent the interests of moneyed donors, corporations, unions, and banks who bring in the bulk of campaign donations? Must this magical experience be to know who the power brokers are in each party and cow-tow to their interests, desires, and platforms? Does this seasoned experience involve knowing who the powerful lobbyists are, what pork to accept and introduce in bills that would benefit their state, the country be damned, at a time when the nation is broke and can ill-afford to borrow more money from China in order to spend beyond our means?  Perhaps this experience means knowing how to better represent the interests of the United Nations and promote their agenda?

Do voters consider desirable the candidate’s ability to say all the right things but do exactly the opposite once in office? Are they desirable because they are handsome/beautiful, young, well-dressed, and articulate, have a nice family, are photogenic, and have served in the military?

Are associations with undesirable characters who do not wish the best for our country even an issue with voters? Apparently not, voters’ memories are short; they repeat the same mistakes because they do not know their own country’s history well.

Talk is quite cheap but when it counts, in the voting booth and political discourse, voters tend to be ill-informed, ignorant, and absent-minded.  They use the most insane reasons to vote for the wrong person, time after time, after time. 

Millions stay home thinking that their vote does not count anyway and the crooks and liars will be voted into office again. Electronic fraud makes it that much easier to prove them right. Other millions have never exercised their right to vote although women’s suffrage was hardly won 93 years ago. These are just numbers to some people. Why worry about it when there is baseball, basketball, football, and other reality shows and distractions on TV?

No candidate wants to be seen as a heartless human being so they promise everything under the sun to every constituent group, careful not to alienate one by promising too much to another. It is ultimately a carefully orchestrated dance of meaningless but articulate and artfully chosen speeches, delivered with utmost confidence, constant hand-shaking, attending fund raisers with all the right power brokers, photo ops, and baby kissing to the tune of millions or billions of dollars, depending on the office sought. A candidate who would try to run his/her campaign from a central location like President McKinley’s front porch campaign would be laughed out of the room.

Candidates are vetted by various groups and individuals, and the endorsement criteria are sometimes strange. Take for instance Mark Sanford, the former Governor of South Carolina who disgraced himself by having a very painful and tragic public affair. He resigned his post but he is now campaigning for U.S. Congress, First Congressional District, running against Elizabeth Colbert Busch, who is not shy about using her famous liberal brother’s name, Steven Colbert. Although The National Republican Congressional Committee has pulled its backing, Sanford has garnered support from Larry Flynt, the king of porn, for the most perplexing reason. “I support him not for his character, but for exposing the [sexual] hypocrisy of traditional values. The liar has exposed the greater lie.”

When the Immigration Reform passes, 11 million more voters, educated into the fine points of citizenship by organizations such as Acorn, will vote to bring here the third world nations they’ve escaped because they truly believe that ever bigger government is the source of their prosperity and wellbeing.

There are also the perennial welfare recipients who vote for a living, early and repeatedly, coached by community organizers and college students eager to bring about the romanticized utopian communism their college professors described in which “social justice” reigns supreme. We must also not forget those who are mentally incompetent to vote but always vote Democrat and those who cast their Democrat vote from the cemetery.

The price tag of any candidate’s campaign and our casual and uninformed indifference to the corrupt political process is the price tag of our enslavement to the wishes of a small minority who rule the country in perpetuity and determine how our lives must be run, our health delivered, what homes we build, how much we pay for gas, how we start and run a business, how much taxes we pay, what  education our children receive, what we eat and drink, how long we live to replenish the spending coffers of the ruling elite, what cars we drive, where we travel, and our freedom in general.