The Myth of Representation – Commentary by Jim Dean

A little trip down memory lane here folks. This New York Times story below was the year I graduated from high school. In all the recent glad-handing over the Iraqi election, no one bothered to look back on another time for parallels.

Elections are not a panacea...but the myth that they are lives on. Arthur Koestler, the infamous ex-Communist reflected upon this in his devastating critiques of the Soviet system and its blind followers.

"Almost every discussion with myth addicts, whether public or private, is doomed to failure. The debate is from the beginning removed from the level of objectivity; arguments are not considered on their merit, but by whether they fit into the system, and if not, how they can be made to fit."

This reminds me of some of the Bush regime's spin gymnastics. But here in Georgia, we had an election recently [2004]. There are claims that we have had a lot of changes, while others suggest we may have swapped one kleptocracy for another, possibly better one. [ Honest Glenn's Rule Changes come to mind... ]

The recent flag poll shows the public quite aware of the bogus flag referendum last year, just as we forewarned they would be, but the politicians went ahead with it anyway. Now, the referendum riggers don't seem to be too concerned what the people think. Is the idea that they are "representing" us a myth?

Koestler goes on in his book 'The Yogi and the Commissar' to describe how resistant Western liberals were to the reality of the Soviet system. Sure you had the right to strike, but the government also had the right to give you the death penalty for doing so. And sure you had the right to vote, but only for a list of candidates selected and pre-approved by the party. There were no other candidates. Those 'elected' received a mandate that "landslide" Bush can only dream about.

What has all this to do with elections, flags, military heritage and the country going to hell? Again Koestler gives his unique insight speaking to America: "Twice within a generation you have saved Western Europe from subjugation. After the first time you have robbed yourself and your dead of the moral credit of their sacrifice."

Little did Koestler know that this would someday become a national pastime in America. The Founding Fathers are now being torn down in an orgy of heritage hatred, and Confederate symbols are buried out of sight while fallen American soldiers are dug from their graves and lynched in the public square. [Examples: Augusta flag removal, the removal of Confederate paintings in Savannah, the Ethnic Cleansing of Dixie, and on and on.... ]

In closing, Koestler again,..."The great catastrophes of history, like the decay of Rome, did not come in one spectacular crash, but by a smooth tobogganing down the slope...It seems a curious law of human nature that the real tragedies are camouflaged by a smooth triviality."

The fair referendum deniers are trivially claiming the State flag issue is over. Why? Because we have had an election and they are still in power. The poll and the desires of eight out of ten Georgia citizens means nothing to them. This makes me feel a little bit like Koestler's Russian voters. And I don't like it.

Jim Dean is the producer of Heritage TV and a member of the Georgia Heritage Council.

Related Links
Mason-Dixon Poll: 79% of Georgians favor a FAIR VOTE on State flag

March [2004] Referendum Settles Nothing

Georgia Trend repeats the BIG LIES (a rebuttal)

Politicians Betrayed Georgia Voters on their flag

Georgia Heritage Expression of Resolve March 3, 2004

Perdue's Lying Habit

The New York Times - September 4, 1967 U.S. Encouraged by Vietnam Vote: Officials Cite 83% Turnout Despite Vietcong Terror WASHINGTON, Sept. 3-- United States officials were surprised and heartened today at the size of turnout in South Vietnam's presidential election despite a Vietcong terrorist campaign to disrupt the voting. According to reports from Saigon, 83 per cent of the 5.85 million registered voters cast their ballots yesterday. Many of them risked reprisals threatened by the Vietcong. The size of the popular vote and the inability of the Vietcong to destroy the election machinery were the two salient facts in a preliminary assessment of the nation election based on the incomplete returns reaching here. A successful election has long been seen as the keystone in President Johnson's policy of encouraging the growth of constitutional processes in South Vietnam. The election was the culmination of a constitutional development that began in January, 1966, to which President Johnson gave his personal commitment when he met Premier Ky and General Thieu, the chief of state, in Honolulu in February. The purpose of the voting was to give legitimacy to the Saigon Government, which has been founded only on coups and power plays since November, 1963, when President Ngo Dinh Deim was overthrown by a military junta. Few members of that junta are still around, most having been ousted or exiled in subsequent shifts of power. Significance Not Diminished The fact that the backing of the electorate has gone to the generals who have been ruling South Vietnam for the last two years does not, in the Administration's view, diminish the significance of the constitutional step that has been taken. The hope here is that the new government will be able to maneuver with a confidence and legitimacy long lacking in South Vietnamese politics. That hope could have been dashed either by a small turnout, indicating widespread scorn or a lack of interest in constitutional development, or by the Vietcong's disruption of the balloting. American officials had hoped for an 80 per cent turnout. That was the figure in the election in September for the Constituent Assembly. Seventy-eight per cent of the registered voters went to the polls in elections for local officials last spring. Before the results of the presidential election started to come in, the American officials warned that the turnout might be less than 80 per cent because the polling place would be open for two or three hours less than in the election a year ago. The turnout of 83 per cent was a welcome surprise. The turnout in the 1964 United States Presidential election was 62 per cent. Captured documents and interrogations indicated in the last week a serious concern among Vietcong leaders that a major effort would be required to render the election meaningless. This effort has not succeeded, judging from the reports from Saigon.