Ralph Nader: We Live Under a Two Party Tyranny

In the second part of his illuminating conversation with me, Ralph Nader explains how America's two party tyranny system does everything to stifle competitive democracy, ripping away choice and blocking opposition from challengers outside the left/right paradigm. Check it out below.

True.

I and probably a lot of others here didn't need Ralph Nader to make us aware of how the 2 party system stifles opposition parties. We're kidding ourselves to think we're living in a country where the government allows us to have choice. They've created laws that affect our own personal choices not just what political parties will represent the American people.

Until the party system is abolished and candidates can run on their own personal beliefs without following a political platform, our political system will continue to be skewed in favor of the corporate and political elite. Political campaigns should be on a level playing field for all candidates, rich or poor, without the influence of special interests and outside money.

I take issue with even calling it "two party." It's two party like heads and tails are two coins.

I'm sure that's the point he's getting at (data transfer too slow to watch it right now), but still ... just even calling it two-party peeves me.

It would be nice if we could abolish the two parties but if we did then people wouldn't know who to vote for. The sheeple have been dumbed down to the point that they think we can only vote for Republican or Democrat. The MSM helps to support this idea because when was the last time you saw a independent in a Presidential debate?

originally posted by: buster2010
It would be nice if we could abolish the two parties but if we did then people wouldn't know who to vote for. The sheeple have been dumbed down to the point that they think we can only vote for Republican or Democrat. The MSM helps to support this idea because when was the last time you saw a independent in a Presidential debate?

Yep they sure screwed Ron Paul the last time around.

a reply to: buster2010
You might be surprised.
A centrist party that didn't use race, religion, entitlement, abortion, sexual orientation or gun ownership as pry bars to separate the population would do very well.
They would likely take the majority of the vote.

It all boils down to money, bribes, pay offs, etc. of the right people to get what they want. There should be limits on how much money a party can use for election and nomination purposes. There are some extremely rich individuals and corporations they can buy whatever politico they want in power.

As far as the government and Wall Street working hand in hand by giving the central banks practically interest free money, which is distributed for buying stocks to maintain the stock market. It is disgustingly blatant.

It puzzle me concerning why no one was arrested for creating worthless financial instruments, i.e. derivatives, then trading them for real assets. Afterwards, getting extremely wealthy from the government bailouts. Maybe there were many that influenced the bailouts with their hand in the cookie jar, so to speak.

a reply to: JesseVentura

When we take away the political leanings of men like Nader and Paul we see that they are treated the same way by this system.

During Nader's strongest campaign against Gore and Bush, when the big debate finally came he was not even allow in the audience, let alone on the stage . Indeed, they had him escorted from one of the satellite viewing rooms and driven away.

I cannot think of Ron Paul without thinking of Nader. Though their ideas on many important issues vary, I have found much to listen to and consider from both.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

During Nader's strongest campaign against Gore and Bush, when the big debate finally came he was not even allow in the audience, let alone on the stage . Indeed, they had him escorted from one of the satellite viewing rooms and driven away.

Really makes you question how controlling our government is behind the scenes. Our media is also controlled. I think after the Watergate scandal with Nixon, our government didn't like how a newspaper editor and 2 reporters had the fortitude to bring the truth out into the public domain. Since that time, hard nosed investigative reporting has been quietly discouraged behind the scenes.

a reply to: incoserv
I agree. It's all one party playing mind games with us to make us actually believe there's a difference between them. You know, the better to divide us so we spend time bickering like fools while they cackle and run away with our money and our country.

He's absolutely right. It's the same in the UK, too (it is the UK system). A practical solution is to introduce proportional representation.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: JesseVentura

When we take away the political leanings of men like Nader and Paul we see that they are treated the same way by this system.

During Nader's strongest campaign against Gore and Bush, when the big debate finally came he was not even allow in the audience, let alone on the stage . Indeed, they had him escorted from one of the satellite viewing rooms and driven away.

I cannot think of Ron Paul without thinking of Nader. Though their ideas on many important issues vary, I have found much to listen to and consider from both.

There is a video on the internet somewhere called "Spin." It shows (well, you hear it) a Democratic candidate (Larry Ingrem?) being arrested as he tries to get in and join the Democratic candidate debate. He was third in the polls. They would not let him debate because he wanted to cut the military budget and spend it on social programs. Clinton looked on impassively. And they call it democracy.

China has a lot to learn from us.

originally posted by: buster2010
It would be nice if we could abolish the two parties but if we did then people wouldn't know who to vote for. The sheeple have been dumbed down to the point that they think we can only vote for Republican or Democrat. The MSM helps to support this idea because when was the last time you saw a independent in a Presidential debate?

This is true. Also it makes it funny when people who toe their respective party's lines religiously start claiming that the other party is going to die because that party didn't win the majority. It happened in 2000 with the Republicans saying the Democrats were going away and it happened again in 2008 with the Democrats saying the Republicans are going away. The fact is NEITHER party will go away, regardless of how it does in the elections. They need each other to keep the illusion of choice going. They know this too. If we suddenly had one major party, people would wake up rather quickly to the duplicity taking place.

Great video.

The education system is broken. Kids are taught about R & D and nothing in between, and they choose the "side" their parents are on... and the other side is the "enemy".

We need to get rid of that labeling and teach kids to be independent thinkers and examine issues from all sides.

It's going to take a long long time to overcome it, if ever.

Sorry Jesse, but hey man, what's new?

originally posted by: guitarplayer

originally posted by: buster2010
It would be nice if we could abolish the two parties but if we did then people wouldn't know who to vote for. The sheeple have been dumbed down to the point that they think we can only vote for Republican or Democrat. The MSM helps to support this idea because when was the last time you saw a independent in a Presidential debate?

Yep they sure screwed Ron Paul the last time around.

Ron Paul is a Republican on every day except election day. I'm amazed how easily he manages to dupe his supporters.

originally posted by: incoserv
I take issue with even calling it "two party." It's two party like heads and tails are two coins.

I'm sure that's the point he's getting at (data transfer too slow to watch it right now), but still ... just even calling it two-party peeves me.

I agree with you. It's the Corporate Uniparty with two branches. Every four years the branches put on a show to create the illusion that they're oppositional parties. Things will never change until people stop voting for either branch. When the election results show that only 15% of the population voted for either branch, the illusion that they represent us will be destroyed.