By Selwyn Duke

To be honest, treating politics
isn’t my favorite pastime. Sure, like
other commentators I do it, but it’s not something I can truly sink my teeth
into. I’ll explain why momentarily.

This election season, my pen has
directed many slings and arrows Barack Obama’s way. I criticized John McCain, too, but that was
during the primaries. Now there is what
I perceive to be a clear and present danger in the person of a slick demagogue,
so my sights – and my site – are trained in one particular direction. Because of this, however, I sometimes receive
emails from disenchanted rightist voters. “What do you have to say about McCain?” some ask. “How is he any better than Obama?”

My feelings toward such respondents
vacillate between surliness and sympathy. I understand why they feel the way they do, but they don’t understand
me. I’m neither a party man nor a
doctrinarian. I’m probably at least as
dissatisfied with our wanting candidates as those who write me, and I can sum
up my reasoning very simply:

Both candidates deserve to lose.

Only, one deserves to lose more.

<!–
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:roman;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1107304683 0 0 159 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;
mso-font-charset:0;
mso-generic-font-family:swiss;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073750139 0 0 159 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-unhide:no;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:10.0pt;
margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
mso-default-props:yes;
font-size:10.0pt;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
–>

But there is something else I
know. Candidates are reflections, and
insofar as they are lacking, they’re symptoms. If you behave as if they are visited upon us by a supernatural hand or
secret conspiracy, you’re fooling yourself. An election is simply a choice of exit ramps after a 500-mile leg of the
never-ending journey on the eternal highway. You can exit right, you can exit left, but make no mistake, your only
decision at that point concerns where to place the power in the locale to which
your wheels have taken you. Sure, the
hearts of some haven’t driven the leg, staying behind in their Model T; those
of others have driven ahead in their Model Z. Then there are those with hearts driving the model Eternity, those rare
timeless travelers. Regardless, many of
these people want to choose a barely-traveled path that, while it may boast
beautiful scenery, can never lead to the throne. Where they wish to reside is just too far
from where the bus of civilization has parked.

Some understand this, some don’t. Our culture is light years from the vision I
consider ideal. Some of you may feel
like a foreigner in your own land, but I could feel like I’m on the wrong
planet. Figuratively speaking, the
journey I wish to take requires the aid of Captain Kirk; it may even require
time travel. I’m not even a
conservative, as that is a person who, generally speaking, is content with the
status quo. I want to overthrow it.  I’m a revolutionary.

This brings us to the point. Revolutions aren’t won or even initiated
through elections; they are either launched militarily (which isn’t easy with a
government that possesses sound-wave weapons and blinding lasers), or culturally. This is the point. “People get the government they deserve,” as
Thomas Jefferson said, because, one way or another, leaders will be a
reflection of the people. Thus, if you
want better choices come election time, the people need to be transformed.

That is the battle that matters,
and it’s one the left understands well. They have long steered that bus with their Gramscian drivers and
navigated with their Gramscian maps, with their control of academia, the media,
Hollywood, popular culture, the Democrat Party, and enough influential activist
groups to wear out gavels in every courtroom in the land. And, then, when voters find themselves on a
desolate stretch of highway gazing at monochrome scenery below gray skies, some
wonder, or lament, or both. “How is it
we only have these two inauspicious exits?” they complain. They write to people like me and ask, “How
come you don’t condemn the right exit as much as the left?” as if not exiting is
even an option, as if picking up your ball and going home will somehow make
home better.

But my answer is simple. As per my metaphor, I understand that more
than a referendum on where we are to go, an election is one on where we’ve
been. It is but a link in a chain, one
of a series of turns, and my only task is – just as it was all along – to try
to turn that bus in the best possible direction at the given moment.

In other words, write me to
commiserate if you must, but understand the silliness of asking me why I fight
for right turns now as I always have. For if you do that, you are compartmentalizing politics, incorrectly
viewing it as a realm that operates separately from the culture. It is not. It is a reflection of it, and its elections are thus only one of many
related kinds in which we vote. We elect
our entertainers and entertainment, media figures and news and commentary
through what we watch, listen to and read. We elect our educators by what we tolerate in our local schools and what
colleges we support with our money. And
we elect our activist groups and religious leaders by whom we choose to donate
money to and what events and houses of worship we attend. So, while many may view our November choice
as a discrete event, it really is just another in a series of elections (albeit
a big one), one whose players were, in a very real way, chosen through those
other elections. Thus, here is my
perspective: My duty in all these elections is to make the best choice
available to me at the moment. If those
choices are lacking, don’t ask me why I wish to make lemonade out of lemons; I
didn’t choose the route. Ask yourself
what the people did – or failed to do – that brought us to this desert.

Transitioning to the literal, let
us discuss what this means. We can curse
the darkness as we note that both major party candidates support amnesty for
illegals, but who really is culpable? McCain and Obama? Sure, all people
must be held accountable, but they are only two men. Do you think they could hold that view and
have ascended politically in a thoroughly patriotic nation? No, they can only bloom in a substrate
degraded with multiculturalism, anti-Americanism, and the moral relativism that
blinds one to cultural dangers. And many
are thus imbued because of brainwashing by the media, academia and other
entities. Why?  Because of all those cultural elections we
lost throughout the decades.

Then there is the specter of
socialized medicine. We may dodge it in this election, but the
writing is on the wall. There was a time
when no one – Republican or Democrat – even contemplated such a thing; now its
necessity has become Democrat dogma and Republicans are starting to accept it
as well. Mitt Romney – a Republican
favorite early in the primaries and a future presidential hopeful – instituted
socialized medicine when governor of Massachusetts. And this is no anomaly, as a poll earlier
this year showed that 52 percent of Republicans supported the principle of forcing Americans to buy health
insurance.

Thus, we would have to be blind to
not know where the bus is heading. Just
as with amnesty, there will soon come a political election in which the 52
percent has become 67, and both candidates “see the wisdom” in government
health care. But what lost elections
will have brought us to that point?

Perhaps a famous apocryphal
quotation may be instructive:

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form
of government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote
themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on the majority
always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public
treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal
policy, always followed by a dictatorship.

This is true, but I must add some
nuance. In the case of people of a moral
fiber sufficient to sustain a democracy, degradation of that fiber is a
prerequisite for the above. Their virtues
of self-sufficiency, kindness and generosity must be allowed to wither and be replaced
with the vices of a spirit of entitlement, envy and greed. Their grit must be turned to talcum as they
are made to believe life should be easy and, if it isn’t, someone is obligated
to make it so. Then they will be content
to rob Peter to pay Paul – as long as they’re Paul.

So what are the lost cultural
elections here? Again, the academics who
teach America’s young don’t help. But
most of all, when we choose how to raise our children, we also vote. We choose what standards to enforce, and when
too many of us kowtow to kids’ whimsy, fail to hold them accountable and
over-indulge them, we shouldn’t expect that, upon maturity, they will vote for
a civil government any different than the family government that coddled and
spoiled them during formative years.

Many of us could provide countless
other examples, but need more be said? The people are the vessel and politicians the water, and the latter just
take the shape of the former. So, yes,
it’s easy enough to criticize any of our candidates, for if you look for the
worst in politicians, you’re sure to find it . . . in abundance. But what are we lamenting really? That John McCain is like so many other older
men in that, to quote a comedic quip, wisdom didn’t come with age – age just
showed up all by itself? That Barack
Obama, like so many other black men, was weaned on a diet of pulpit-projected
bigotry and Saul Alinsky socialist politics and mistakes foolishness for
wisdom? That “conservative” Sarah Palin created
a new sub-cabinet in Alaska to address climate change and reduce greenhouse gas
emissions? That they are all just
creatures of the age? What did you
expect? We define the age, and they reflect us.

Of course, we could still believe
the political is divorced from the cultural, that our current big and
bigger-government choices are some isolated political accident. We could, as some did in 2000 and 2004,
believe that we will find our shining-city-on-a-hill savior four years hence.

We won’t.

That is, unless we could somehow,
some way start winning those cultural elections. To believe otherwise is to be blind to the
itinerary of that bus.

So don’t ask me why I won’t level
criticism based on quota; don’t ask me to be blind to distinctions between
dank, dark, miasma-ridden locales. I
know our lost cultural elections have placed us on a highway that bends steadily
toward the left, but in the upcoming political election – this referendum on
our culture – we will choose the
right or left exit. And don’t tell me
that neither exit is worth taking, because, well, that I know also.

But
one of them is not worth taking more.

          By Selwyn Duke