They voted for what they thought the candidates stood for.
They voted for what they hoped the candidates stood for.
The candidate, Obama, was perceived as representing what the government can do for the people.
The candidate, Romney, was perceived as representing what people can do for themselves.
Of course, these two candidates are agents of change in exactly the same way. They are laying brick and establishing a highway for more control over the citizenry.
But I want to focus on the public perception of Obama and Romney as symbols.
Obama's victory signifies the acceptance by about half country that the federal government is a gift-giver. That is its mission.
A smaller part of the nation still believes in freedom of the individual, while the larger part believes in what the government can give them.
The numbers of people who have faith in a gift-giving government will continue to grow. They will no longer enjoy the gifts; they will simply and plainly expect them, just as they expect trees to have leaves.
And expecting them, they will demand them.
Yet some people praise this turn of events. They see it as fairness and equality and justice and humanitarianism and even payback.
But it is an enlarging disaster, not only psychologically and, yes, spiritually, but also in the sense of "beware Greeks bearing gifts," because Trojan horses are being moved to center stage, presaging an acceleration of attacks on the population.
The gift-giving is a cover for a greater clamp-down on freedoms. The gift-giving is a sop to keep people entranced. The gift-giving is a symptom of Central Planning, in which all citizens are viewed, from the top of the pyramid, as units, ciphers, things to be moved about and regulated and controlled.
This is the future we have entered.
"Here is what we give you. Now you are ours. You belong to us. We will watch you carefully. We will track you and take care of you and decide what is good for you. You have your gifts. Now you owe us."
From the top of the pyramid, the question will be: how much do we have to give them to keep them satisfied? Or: how little can we get away with?
Obama's victory signifies all this.
Romney's showing reveals that a significant number of people still believe in freedom, even though they completely fooled and willed themselves into thinking he stood for that principle, when he didn't.
Large numbers of Americans are in thrall to glossy faith in the New Age. They see Obama as the symbol of generosity and giving...finally incarnated in American politics, for the very first time.
It's not politics, they believe. It's kindness. It's goodness.
Actually, it's blindness. Their own.
But they won't permit exposure of their delusion. It's too painful. They have so little faith in their own individual power, and so much replacement-faith in the power of The Great Pink Bubble, that they'll do whatever it takes to live inside it.
To live inside it, they'll accept the "protection" that goes along with the gifts; the protection against harm, against the real world, against the specter of terrorism.
The federal government is reaching out to state and local governments and private citizens, as never before, to bolster its program of universal surveillance and spying and snitching.
The real purpose of this program is to put the idea in people's minds that there are severe limits on what it is safe to do and say and think. I'd wager you've already experienced that.
"What if I let my child play in the front yard by himself? What will the neighbors think? What will they say? Who will they tell? Will some person working in some government agency take a dim view of that? Will I be paid a visit? Will they claim I'm irresponsible? Will I be fined or punished? Will my friends think I'm weird..."
This is the increasing price for living in the "gifting society."
In the next few years, you're going to read a news story about somebody who, in the privacy of his living room, watching his new Smart TV that records his moves and words, blurted out an "anti-social comment," and somehow that remark found its way on to YouTube.
Interestingly, the outcry against violation of privacy will fade before angry accusations against the "offender." How could he say that? What kind of person would say that? He's sick. He should be locked up...
People will forget that this kind of monitoring was supposed to be all about combating terrorism.
Well, it was never about terrorism.
It will be Christmas every day, but the gifts will drop on to the floor in a room where the walls are slowly closing in.
Jon Rappoport The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com
About the author: The author of an explosive new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. www.nomorefakenews.com