AMERICA AND THE REACTIONARY.
Must not the ordinary folk fight back?
The political battle sizzling between Romney and Santorum in the Republican Party nomination race is a real fight after all; but it must not end up the same way as Reagan and G.W. Bush, Sr., when one will become the president of the United States and the other his vice-president.
People in the know would remember that the antagonistic fervor has been as fierce between Reagan and G. W. Bush, as it was going on with the two front runners of the party.
However, let us suppose that the Republican Party would beat the Democratic Party for the White House in the 2012 presidential election, and the repeat of the 1980s of Republican governments following one another would occur.
Reagan in his tenure did nothing for the country, except to attack a small Island, Granada, in the Caribbean; plus uttering the now famous words, "...tear down that wall," asking Mikhail Gorbachev of the then USSR to free the two countries that the Berlin Wall was separating, East Germany and West Germany, to becoming one nation, as Germany.
That administration was also froth with scandal, such as the Iran Contra Affair, which brought no credit to the United States.
After that came the G.W. Bush administration, which would last another eight years, and in which he was able stop Saddam Hussein from seizing the rich enclave of the Persian Gulf of Kuwait, and that was good for America; showing that it could help its friends and allies, because it (Kuwait) was a U.S. ally.
Otherwise that period, and especially starting with the Reagan years, was a waste, as America achieved nothing spectacular in the world.
Fast-forwarding to the present, one would not put it past the Republicans that they would do it again, particularly as they were organized under the conservative banner "to claim America back," as they were advocating.
Their sole attempt would be to thwart a new experiment that has produced the first African American president, to take the nation back to the days, when very few opportunities were available to a great majority of Americans.
Economic and political upward mobility depended on demographics and social status, meaning the wealthy and the affluent had the lion's share of any type of power in society, a situation normally known as the "status quo".
The 2008 presidential election made it clear that America had so much to offer, in terms of making the playing field even, for all its citizens and for them to prove their worthiness. The old was past and gone, but that was what the conservatives were determined to revert the country to, with a Wall Street tycoon spearheading that effort, as the Republican Party front runner to challenge President Barack Obama in the forthcoming general election, just to put back the clock of progress.
However, people were realizing that the election was for the future of the country, with the wealthy wielding power, and the middle class and working men and women having nothing to show for their input into the country's well being.
They were preparing to gird their loins, to make sure that their interests are protected, by voting for their own kind, who happen to be Democrats, not only to keep the presidency, but also to regain the U.S. House of Representatives, in order to maintain the balance of power between the wealthy Wall Street tycoons and their lobbyists in Washington D.C. on one side, and ordinary folks in Trade Unions and such organizations, on the other.
The Obama administration has sparked a political revolution sweeping the world, proving that every individual must be given a chance to reach his or her potential in life. Also, people must be allowed to run their own affairs, and not despots and dictators.
It is a movement that nobody, but nobody can stop; as anything else will be a throwback, and a victory for the reactionary conservatives.
The ordinary people need to fight back, as they are, in every sphere and/or capacity possible, as it is their right; including the 2012 presidential election, of course.
No comments yet.