Qui Tacet Consentire

Qui Tacet Consentire

The Pew Research center is reporting a rapidly changing political landscape. The latest research of political party identification indicates that as of April 2009, 33% of the people identified themselves as Dems, 22 % as Pubs and 39% as Indies. If one adds the above percentages the total would be 94% which leaves nearly 10% who are either apolitical or are the traditional 10% who just never goes along with the rest of the people. The Pew Research Center is one of the most respected polling organizations around and is generally viewed as being apolitical so the above political identification trend data probably reflects a great deal of reality. However, just as Will Rogers repeated the famous retort that “there are lies, damn lies, and statistics”, polling and the resulting published data and analysis can be manipulated just as easily as statistical data and analysis. That is to say, polling results should be viewed with a great deal of suspicion, and by all means, one should never accept polling data from any political entity as truthful because such political polling is the AK-47 of political combat. In general, one should always be skeptical of any polling data, even data from the Pew Research Center. Here is anther reason why. I always refuse to participate in polling because I don’t think it is anyone’s business what I think, notwithstanding my natural resistance to being manipulated by some existential psychology major who has crafted leading and deceitful questions for me to answer along with God-only-knows-what other modern polling tomfoolery. In other words, I take the Don Vito Corleone instruction to Sonny very seriously, "Never tell anybody outside the family what you're thinking." And besides, when they hold elections in a democracy, they will find out rather quickly what the electorate is thinking. If I, and others like me, refuse to participate in polling, how is that situation accounted for in the polling data? For example, lets say 30% of the people contacted were just like me and refuse to be polled. Lets also conjecture that of that 30% that refused to be polled, 70% now consider themselves Independents. How is this data factoid accounted for in the Poll analysis and final published data? There is an even a darker side to political polling. The Flim Flam politicians that sponsor polling are trying to find out what is trending in the general population so that they can craft positions and expenditures to gain advantage over other politicians. In other words, the politician is only concerned about the expediency of the moment and the polling is the time-honored way of gaining political Intel in order to do so. Polling is not required if a Politician presents their political philosophy and positions and then debates the advantage of their candidacy in today’s circumstance. Why should anyone trust a Politician’s position that always twists and turns with expediency that polling has enabled? Here is even a greater problem with polling. People read and digest polling data and the ensuing debate in the media provides for a feeling that the people are being heard. Nothing could be further from the truth because those who design the polling are establishing the agenda and resulting conversation. In other words, the national political conversation is not the spontaneous voice of the people, it is instead, contrived dialog designed and manufactured by those in power in order to control popular political thought and remain in power. I believe most people understand what is going on but there is a general feeling of hopelessness because the political system as outlined in the Constitution is not working and so the great silent majority remain just that, silent. I believe the silent majority remains silent not out of apathy, but they are silent because most of us believe we have no real say in our Government and there is no way for our voice to be heard. I believe this is why people are rapidly changing their political identification as Independent rather than Dem or Pub because there is no real difference between the two national parties and the two political parties are corrupt to the extent they only view the electorate and citizens as vehicles to maintain personal power and so care little about what the public really thinks. The current Professional Politicians populating the national political Parties are people only interested in obtaining and remaining in power and they can hardly be described as patriots worthy of a vote or affirmation. Herein lies the problem, Qui Tacet Consentire. (Who is silent gives consent.)