Zombie voters and fortune cookies

The Loose Cannon Libertarian

Who are Barack Obama’s supporters?

Picture an old 1950s era black-and-white zombie movie. The undead rise from their graves, begin lurching forward, arms outstretched, eyes vacant, all murmuring eerily in unison, “Change, change, change…”

obamainaustin02.jpg
photo / roxannejomitchell “Change, change, change…” 

Except Obama’s zombies don’t rise from graves. They emerge from high schools and colleges and Hollywood soundstages and media centers.

Much has been made of Obama’s appeal to American youth. His hook is emotion and vague idealism, which works well on people loaded with emotion and vague idealism but little in the way of experience and genuine knowledge. A generation that barely discerns between Bambi and actual rutting deer can’t be expected to distinguish charisma from substance.

So teeners and twenty-somethings are expected to vote for The Bama in big numbers because (here comes the part nobody wants to admit publicly) it’s cool, trendy, chic, sexy to have a black guy for president. It’s also a perfect opportunity for the cool, trendy, chic, sexy types to prove to themselves, and to one other, that they’re not racist.

But their votes will be offset by the (other part nobody wants to publicly admit) true American racists, salt of the earth folks who will beat their breasts while staunchly declaring their utter lack of prejudice to the pollsters, but once they’re alone in the voting booth they will quietly grab that lever and pull it hard for “Anybody But The Black Guy.”

Obama will also get the entertainer vote. Professional emoters, like actors and singers and dancers and millionaire movie moguls who want to fit in with the rest of the emoting clique, tend to approach everything else in life by emoting about it as well: cry for the camera, moan for the microphone, support the guy with the squishy “change” mantra.

Academics and media mavens and environmentalists and all other members of the emoting classes will also board the Obama bandwagon because it’s cool, trendy, chic, sexy to be (another truth that can’t be uttered in polite society) a Marxist, which they pretend not to be by calling themselves “progressive.”

As Obama is an empty suit, John McCain is his haberdashery opposite – the would-be emperor who has no clothes.

For a John McCain mental moment, picture him standing on the stage of a 10,000-seat auditorium. Mingling behind him is every politician’s usual gang of power-pimping hangers-on, sycophants, kiss-ups, weasels, and toadies. Now look at the audience and note that the 10,000 seats are filled to overflowing with three people.

John McCain stands for everything and nothing. He’s too liberal to attract conservatives, too conservative to please liberals, too big government power-wielding authoritarian to interest libertarians.

This is because the John McCain philosophy of governance is a gigantic grab bag of fortune cookies stuffed full of utterly unconnected and inconsistent bits and pieces of political chaff.

Pull out a cookie and break it open. “There is a Mexican-American border fence in your future.” That will hack off the liberals, but it’ll capture the hardcore fundamentalist anti-immigrant conservative vote, even though nearly every one of their forbears were illegal immigrants themselves (unless, of course, they can prove that the native peoples of America granted European settlers legal permission to enter their lands.)

Crunch another cookie. “Riddle: What fails to curb soft money but succeeds in abridging freedom of speech? Answer: McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform.” That hacked off his conservative base but the emoting progressive nee Marxist capitalist-hating libs loved it.

In the end, McCain has his own army of zombies, Republicans who vote Republican because they’ve always voted Republican because their parents voted Republican even though they couldn’t possibly tell you what Republicanism is. (They’ll happily finger-tick Conservative principles and religious principles and traditional principles and family values but they haven’t a clue about actual Republican party political principles.)

So there’s your choice, America: Czar of the Zombies or the Fortune Cookie Candidate.

About the author Garry Reed is a longtime advocate of the libertarian philosophy of non-coercion that espouses personal autonomy and individual responsibility, civil rights and economic liberty, maximum freedom and minimum government. His website is freecannon.com.

Comments

J Mo's picture

You’re right about one thing, Richard Marx is sexy.

Anonymous's picture

“…but it’ll capture the hardcore fundamentalist anti-immigrant conservative vote, even though nearly every one of their forbears were illegal immigrants themselves (unless, of course, they can prove that the native peoples of America granted European settlers legal permission to enter their lands.)” = DUMB!!

Was this land a sovereign nation with immigration laws prior to European settlers?

I hate when people make rediculous comparisons.

MamaLiberty's picture

The only possible “sovereign” is the individual. Only individuals can have rights. A “nation” is a group of individuals and has no life or substance of its own.

Every person on the planet comes from forebears who immigrated from one place to another at some point. It’s only morally “illegal” if they attack and kill others to take their place - but every race and creed has done this at some point.

The “indians” driven out and murdered by the Europeans had murdered and driven out other “indians” before that.

Nobody has any stones to throw, which I gather was Garry’s point.

kuhlio's picture

It bothers me when large segments of the population are labeled “zombies” simply because they do not agree with the author.

It is easy to take shots at these candidates and their constituents from the outside looking in. There are reasons why most Americans don’t take libertarians any more seriously then they do the green party. You can call these voters zombies if you like but in the end it comes down to a less idealistic view of the world.

Compromise isn’t the same thing as selling out your beliefs and unless dictatorial rule sounds appealing most people in government understand its necessity to order to get things accomplished.

Anonymous's picture

First of all, it is clearly obvious that he’s not calling them zombies for the sole reason with disagreeing with them. This is evident because he does not agree with McCain supporters either, yet they are not called zombies.

As far as your last sentence on compromise, it sounds more like, “Compromise isn’t the same thing as selling out your beliefs and unless dictatorial rule sounds appealing most people in government understand [compromise’s] necessity [in] order to get dictatorial rule.”

Because, in the end, that’s what you mean by “getting things accomplished.” Social Security, socialized healthcare, and a litany of other government programs have the sole effect of increasing the power of the people ruling over us.

Anonymous's picture

Here is what the author said about McCain’s supporters. Of all the republicans I know I have yet to meet this Republican zombie described here.

“Ithe end, McCain has his own army of zombies, Republicans who vote Republican because they’ve always voted Republican because their parents voted Republican even though they couldn’t possibly tell you what Republicanism is.”

Maybe we should do away with the Constitution and have libertarians rewrite it (assuming they could agree to something) even though they don’t even represent close to 50% of the population. After all isn’t the Constitution itself one big compromise.