My Experience at the Republican caucus at Quail Elementary School
Assignment for my Economics Class
Jordan Miller
March 20th 2014
I went to the republican caucus with my dad and my girl friend and it was pretty awful. I was in high spirits as we parked a block away (because it was so packed) and walked to the school. There was a line out the entrance because people were stationed there pointing attendees to the rooms associated with their respective precincts. Once we squeezed our way though we made our way to the cafeteria room to sit at low to the ground, hard uncomfortable tables for the next 3 hours. My spirits began to fall.
Before we sat down we stood in another line to register. When it was my turn I politely informed the nice old lady that I was already a registered republican but that I preferred not to be and asked her how to unregister as such. I could tell by the way she stared at me that she was offended and wondered if this was a joke in bad taste. It was not a joke. The lady next to her told me to call the “county office.” I thanked her and didn't hold up the line by requesting clarification.
It wasn't long before the festivities began but in the interim I overheard a conversation about the Crimean issue between Russia and Ukraine. The speaker seemed to have the opinion that the entire issue didn't concern the USA in principal or practicality and I was inclined to agree with his point of view finding it logically consistent with universal moral values. Unfortunately, that was the most bit of reason I was to hear all night.
The lady running the whole shindig was named Lori Zinoni, she was an abrasive, avid patriot with a voice that could carry throughout the entire room unassisted. She introduced herself as “the chair,” explained lied that this would be 2 hour event and called on someone to pray.
I found my mind wandering as it often does during prayer. What would have happened if the prayer was said in Arabic? Or the God addressed was Yahweh? Then the speaker said something, “...we are gathered in the spirit of patriotism...” Patriotism, what does that mean? Love for one’s country? Why should one love his country? Would the country need to be worthy of that love? How could it prove it was? Who would be doing the proving? Is a country the same as its government?
Then another word caught my attention, “...help us carry out our responsibilities…” What responsibilities? To whom am I responsible? Should my allegiance and responsibility to my country enticed by what my country does for me or is it simply my duty, no questions asked? Is he talking about government or society? The prayer was over before I knew it.
But the questions were not. The very next thing Chair-lady-Zinoni did was to inform us that we will now pledge allegiance to the flag. But with such heavy questions in my heart how could I pledge my allegiance? And why to a flag? A flag doesn't give orders, people do. The more I thought about it the more questions I had and the more every word anyone said sounded like war obsessed death-cult propaganda. Well maybe that's a little too harsh...maybe not.
Next was the reading of the Salt Lake County Republican platform. I don’t think I could find a more wishy washy, self-contradictory and terrifying document if I tried. Let me just give you a few examples of what I’m talking about.
Exhibit A. “We...declare our support for government based upon a moral and spiritual foundation.” That's in the first sentence. Alright. First of all, what is a spiritual foundation? An incorporeal foundation? An ethereal foundation? Aren't those contradictions in terms? I don’t know what to make of it so lets move on to moral.
Government by its very nature is the initiation of force against its own citizens. If there is no initiation of force (ie taxation, drafting to war, arbitrary laws etc.) there is no government. The initiation of force (ie violence, theft, etc.) is immoral. By using the logic a=b=c, a=c we can fundamentally prove that Government is itself an immoral institution. Here let me spell it out: violence=evil, government=violence, government=evil.
So it makes no sense to “declare our support for government based on a moral” anything. The differences in immorality of government from one state to another is one of degree rather than kind, they’re all intrinsically immoral because the concept of government is an immoral concept. This is the first example of self-contradiction in the document, there were many more.
Can I just say, apart from being terrified about the logical inconsistency and replete statements of contradictory principles in this document, it also housed many specific beliefs I found to be disturbing. For instance, it referenced securing our borders at least twice, vast military might at least twice and reference God several times. I found these assertions particularly disturbing because none of them are born from reason and they’re all born from prejudice. And with repetition red flags were waving.
It was also uncanny that the writers of the document obviously understood that the “power to tax is the power to control” If I remember correctly. I say this is uncanny because they’re not able to comprehend that controlling others is wrong (otherwise they would be for the elimination of all taxes). Understanding the power of taxation so completely but not comprehending the immorality of using that power utterly proves the writers (and adopters) of this document are in every practical respect amoral.
That is a terrifying thing to realize when you find yourself surrounded by neighbors, nodding their heads to such dogmatic propaganda. Oh, its freakishly chilling to realize these people you interact with everyday, people you grew up with don’t have any fundamental moral principles and will do whatever suits their needs.
After the document was read in its infinite entirety we had a blessing or a curse depending on your point of view. Apparently in my dad’s district there lives a senator, Wayne Niederhauser, or something. Great, an actual professional politician. This night just keeps getting better and better. Well he stood up and said a few words which felt like a few hundred thousand.
He would not shut up! He talked about his career, about how great the caucus system is because he gets more face time with voters, oh and hes up for re-election next year by the way. He talked about how he has to be in session for a full 45 days out of the year! Wow, that's rough. I almost walked out.
You know these politicians do nothing for society, he even admitted it, he said, “you don’t want us to be in session longer because then we’d pass more bills which is not a good thing, you don’t want us passing more bills.” And he said it with a smile on his face as if the fact that he is aware of how he makes life harder on people and leeches off the public was a joke. I didn't laugh. What a douche.
When asked about the common core he gave a few basics but then said, “I’m not qualified to assess that” when it came to the details. Well if he’s not qualified to assess that then who is? Is it not his job to be qualified to assess that? He is the one voting after all. Besides how hard can it be? What, he can’t assess elementary math?
But when it came time to explain voting rights and procedures he knew all about that. He was able to tell us in precise detail what counties were able to vote on what, did you know counties that are on city lines can do this or that blah blah blah I stopped listening. Enough about Senator good-for-nothing.
On to elections! Elections are a silly thing. An interesting thing too. My father will send back a meal if it isn't what he wanted. He doesn't buy one-size-fits all shoes he buys his exact size. But when it comes to voting if he doesn't get exactly what he wants, meh, no biggy.
And why does he let it slide? Why does he settle for one-size-fits-all when it comes to government? Because he knows they are capable of nothing greater. He knows they are not as robust as the free market, he knows they don’t have to entice him or persuade him, they are the ones with all the guns after all. No, voting for a one size-fits-all (something he wouldn't stand for in freedom) seems like a privilege in captivity.
The fact that nobody can see this, or the fact that everybody will ignore this kinda freaks me out a bit. Honestly it does. And that is why after the votes were cast (which I did not take part in) and the chairs and delegates chosen I got the hell out of there, never to return again.
I’ll give you a bottom line of my experience - it was a total and complete waste of time.
No comments:
Post a Comment