The Western electoral system of "representative democracy" is sold as a system where the people are in control and decide who should run the country, However it is a system that the rich and powerful bunch of parasites, love and endorse, why? Simple because it creates that illusion of people controlling their destiny, and in no way changes who is actually in control. Elections are merely a platform for the various factions within the power mongers club, on what little variations they wish to make in their carving up the wealth of the country. A slight shift in power from one bunch of over privileged parasites to another, without the need for blood. What is more, the wealth they are slicing and dicing to their own particular advantage, is a wealth that is totally created by the individuals that vote and support the illusion, and have no real say on how that wealth should be divided. Elections are nothing more than a liars and cheats competition, the group that can convincingly spout the greatest lie, is usually the group that gets the bosses seat, until the next election charade.
An extract from an interesting article on the American election from Anarkismo.net:
Continue reading HERE:In demonstrations across the United States, protesters have raised signs saying, “Not My President!” Obviously they are not denying that state machinery has given Donald J. Trump the position of head of state and commander-in-chief of the armed forces, ruler of the mightiest and wealthiest state in the world. What they are denying is Trump’s legitimacy for the position, his moral right to claim the presidency.
Under the capitalist system, electoral democracy serves several purposes. One is that it permits factions of the ruling capitalist elite to struggle over their different programs (based on differing interests) and to make final decisions—without civil wars or establishing a dictatorship (both of which can be costly).
Another major purpose of capitalist democracy is that it fools the people into thinking that they run the country. It lets them think that they are free people, not subjects of a very rich minority. It distracts them from the fact that the day after an election, most adults go to work (those who have jobs) and take orders from unelected bosses. This goal requires that they see the government as legitimately representing the voters.
That became an issue even before the end of the campaign. Expecting to lose, Trump insisted that the election was “rigged.” He refused to say whether he would accept the results if he lost. Politicians and pundits, Democrats and Republicans, were aghast! They cried that it was contrary to the whole system to not accept the election results. It was essential to peacefully hand over power. They reminded us how George W. Bush had lost the popular vote to Al Gore, but that the Supreme Court majority had given the election to Bush—and that Gore, as a loyal supporter of the system, had not fought it. Even earlier, Richard Nixon believed that he had lost to John F. Kennedy only because (Nixon told close friends) the Daley machine in Chicago had fraudulently over counted votes for Kennedy. But Nixon did not make a fuss. That was supposedly the American way!The Rigging of the 2016 U.S. ElectionThe most obvious aspect of the unfairness of the 2016 election results is that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote. She won almost 3 million more votes than Trump. Due to the distribution of the votes, however, she lost in the archaic Electoral College. In the 18th century, this was originally created to be a buffer between the voters and the election of the president, to be a compromise between large and small states, and to strengthen the power of the slave-holders. The distorting influence of the Electoral College is increased by the “winner take all” rules of almost every state, so that Democrats in Texas and Republicans in New York might as well stay home. No other capitalist democracy has such an indirect system; in all others, the “popular vote” is just the “vote.” Despite its obvious injustices, the establishment has never made an effort to alter or abolish the Electoral College.
