Alan Keyes
Congressional elections and the political culture of liberty
By Alan Keyes
Why does the elitist faction's strategy for controlling the outcome of national elections focus on presidential rather than congressional election years?
During presidential election years, the focus on presidential politics magnifies the impact of the elitist faction's control of national media outlets and the large money resources needed to support the mobilization of voters on a national basis. On that scale, individuals may rightly be skeptical about the impact their efforts can have on such a large-scale mobilization.
Congressional election districts are significantly smaller. Votes are gathered and tallied in precincts that are smaller still. A core of activist voters who build a network of friends, acquaintances, co-workers, and fellow worshipers can have a decisive impact on the votes cast at the precinct level. Working in coordination with like-minded people in other precincts throughout their congressional district, they can not only build, but keep track of the size of the vote their united efforts will produce.
The elitist faction wants people to feel relatively powerless, daunted by the magnitude of a national task that seems well beyond their limited reach. But midterm elections focus people on the relatively smaller states and districts in which they vote for their congressional representatives. The political task of gathering in the congressional districts, and the precincts of which they are composed, is less daunting. The tangible progress they can make in building a victorious majority is more significant. When that tangible result is portrayed in the context of similar results being produced by other members of their network, victory ceases to be just a goal. It becomes a calculable prospect, which grows more likely the more consistently they work to achieve it.
Think this through, and you realize why the would-be dictators of the elitist faction love the prospect of elections that have the character of a vast national plebiscite. Such elections enormously increase the ability of an elite few, well-fortified by wealth and their control or influence over national and even international media and business enterprises, to manipulate and control the outcome. But when the people vote by smaller districts and divisions, they can build decisive voting networks by working their own contacts, and through their involvement in local institutions where their involvement has greater significance (like their churches).
To be sure, the elitist clique can still use its money and institutional (mass media) power to mobilize votes. But in the smaller voting divisions, the personal efforts of individuals, properly concerted and organized, can neutralize and outstrip this advantage. People who mobilize themselves don't need vast external resources to mobilize votes. Their mobilization is the vote.
Obviously, once people get into the habit of mobilizing themselves in the smaller districts and divisions, they have already mastered the ability to mobilize, by district and division, in a way that puts victory in larger arenas, including their states and the nation as a whole, within their reach. It's just a matter of establishing a reliable pattern of communication with networks already at work in the other smaller districts and divisions.
This thinking offers a clue as to the sincere commitment America's founders made to government of, by, and for the people. As I have discussed at length in other posts, the election of the President of the United States and the President of the U.S. Senate (the vice president) by an electoral college, composed of voters chosen by voters in their smaller districts and divisions, actually makes sure that even during the presidential election years, voters organized to do so can neutralize the superior money and institutional resources of factional elitist cliques inimical to the sovereignty of the people.
Americans who want to restore and perpetuate their constitutional self-government ought to take to heart the founders' benevolent insight into the genius of the American people. They should work to cultivate and maintain an American political culture that focuses likeminded American patriots on mobilizing themselves in their smaller districts and divisions. This will systematically develop the personal habits, organizational networks, and lines of communication that can then be turned into the basis for political victory at every level.
The elitist faction totalitarians want people to think of themselves as masses, passively shaped and manipulated by the government of others. Patriots determined to preserve liberty should rather think of themselves as individuals, associated by their own decisions and efforts in networks of action whereby they fulfill their common, God-endowed responsibility for self-government.
November 15, 2013
Why does the elitist faction's strategy for controlling the outcome of national elections focus on presidential rather than congressional election years?
During presidential election years, the focus on presidential politics magnifies the impact of the elitist faction's control of national media outlets and the large money resources needed to support the mobilization of voters on a national basis. On that scale, individuals may rightly be skeptical about the impact their efforts can have on such a large-scale mobilization.
Congressional election districts are significantly smaller. Votes are gathered and tallied in precincts that are smaller still. A core of activist voters who build a network of friends, acquaintances, co-workers, and fellow worshipers can have a decisive impact on the votes cast at the precinct level. Working in coordination with like-minded people in other precincts throughout their congressional district, they can not only build, but keep track of the size of the vote their united efforts will produce.
The elitist faction wants people to feel relatively powerless, daunted by the magnitude of a national task that seems well beyond their limited reach. But midterm elections focus people on the relatively smaller states and districts in which they vote for their congressional representatives. The political task of gathering in the congressional districts, and the precincts of which they are composed, is less daunting. The tangible progress they can make in building a victorious majority is more significant. When that tangible result is portrayed in the context of similar results being produced by other members of their network, victory ceases to be just a goal. It becomes a calculable prospect, which grows more likely the more consistently they work to achieve it.
Think this through, and you realize why the would-be dictators of the elitist faction love the prospect of elections that have the character of a vast national plebiscite. Such elections enormously increase the ability of an elite few, well-fortified by wealth and their control or influence over national and even international media and business enterprises, to manipulate and control the outcome. But when the people vote by smaller districts and divisions, they can build decisive voting networks by working their own contacts, and through their involvement in local institutions where their involvement has greater significance (like their churches).
To be sure, the elitist clique can still use its money and institutional (mass media) power to mobilize votes. But in the smaller voting divisions, the personal efforts of individuals, properly concerted and organized, can neutralize and outstrip this advantage. People who mobilize themselves don't need vast external resources to mobilize votes. Their mobilization is the vote.
Obviously, once people get into the habit of mobilizing themselves in the smaller districts and divisions, they have already mastered the ability to mobilize, by district and division, in a way that puts victory in larger arenas, including their states and the nation as a whole, within their reach. It's just a matter of establishing a reliable pattern of communication with networks already at work in the other smaller districts and divisions.
This thinking offers a clue as to the sincere commitment America's founders made to government of, by, and for the people. As I have discussed at length in other posts, the election of the President of the United States and the President of the U.S. Senate (the vice president) by an electoral college, composed of voters chosen by voters in their smaller districts and divisions, actually makes sure that even during the presidential election years, voters organized to do so can neutralize the superior money and institutional resources of factional elitist cliques inimical to the sovereignty of the people.
Americans who want to restore and perpetuate their constitutional self-government ought to take to heart the founders' benevolent insight into the genius of the American people. They should work to cultivate and maintain an American political culture that focuses likeminded American patriots on mobilizing themselves in their smaller districts and divisions. This will systematically develop the personal habits, organizational networks, and lines of communication that can then be turned into the basis for political victory at every level.
The elitist faction totalitarians want people to think of themselves as masses, passively shaped and manipulated by the government of others. Patriots determined to preserve liberty should rather think of themselves as individuals, associated by their own decisions and efforts in networks of action whereby they fulfill their common, God-endowed responsibility for self-government.
To see more articles by Dr. Keyes, visit his blog at LoyalToLiberty.com and his commentary at WND.com and BarbWire.com.
© Alan KeyesThe views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
