The past week has consisted of complete Olympic enthrallment. Everything from the intense speed on the table tennis court to the miraculous feats in the pool has held my family's undivided attention. Like clockwork during these Olympics, the same four or five commercials are broadcast. In the age of Netflix and Hulu, rarely do we see commercials any more. The Comcast commercial in particular did not sit well with my youngest brother, who is 15. After it aired one night, he turned to me and asked "Does Comcast really own NBC and Universal?" Yes, yes indeed they do.
This stunning revelation shocked my brother, who was completely unaware of how little variety actually existed. To continue his disbelief, I then showed him the following Huffington post image about the ten companies that control largely all of our consumer goods.
This daunting photo turned his world upside down. This photo meant that when he spent hours in the aisles of a super market, no matter what choice he made, it would probably benefit one of ten companies. This was unsettling for both of us, and now raises the question, "How much of a choice do we really have?"
Social media is flooded with "must-haves," promotions and celebrity endorsements, but those are normally paid for. Highly popular Twitter accounts often all tweet the same picture of "OMG I NEED" items that are being promoted by the company, not out of love for that item. I could repeat to you every word of a Chevy or a Progressive commercial because they could afford the screen time, not because I know anything about their product. This technological age sways our buying habits whether we acknowledge it or not.
This train of thought that night led me to the arena in which we have most lost our ability to choose -- the general election. A two party system, a cut-and-dry "for or against" is not a choice at all. The Parliament of the United Kingdom exercises a proportional representation. This system differs in that whatever percentage of the votes a party receives, they get the same percentage of seats filled by their party in parliament. A poll was conducted in 2012 showing the break down of the House of Representatives in terms of proportional representation.
This image shows 8 parties being represented in pretty large numbers. This is a disheartening figure considering that for our presidential election a candidate must be polling at 15 percent in order to debate. In turn, the 15 percent polling number would mean a max of six candidates with the ability to debate. Six candidates, with no sort of majority, is far from the eight parties proportionally present in the U.S. in 2012.
On top of the "toe-the-party-line" mentality, there is clear corruption and media pressure on both sides influencing the election much more than it should. The Democratic National Convention recently had emails released over wiki-leaks proving that the entire DNC was conspiring to hold Bernie Sanders back in the primaries. The documentary "Outfoxed" shows just how forced the conservative agenda is on Fox News. This is as close to "House of Cards" or "Scandal" as our nation is going to get, but there's no choice when the deck is stacked against independent decision making.
Our political parties have adapted and molded to fit the times before, and this two-party system has clearly outlived its welcome. We do not agree on every issue, so why should we have a strict party line that forces a narrow constraint on our own opinions? The lessor of two evils is not a choice.
