Today’s artwork is of a dark nature [cynical surrealistic gloom of a sky wave crashing at night].
Froth can be either a mass of small liquid bubbles creating a foam or it can be worthless rhetoric that has no substance, such as a political speech. Yes, believe it or not, some political speeches are froth with insubstantial worthless rhetoric that may have absolutely zero substance.
When a politician says, “My opponent is a socialist sympathizer,” what does that really mean? After all, the United States Department of Defense, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, public school systems, police departments, fire departments, departments of public works, etc., are all examples of government operated entities that are for the benefit of society (socialism). In reality, calling an opponent a socialist can easily mean that they support a system of government that promotes having social programs and using tax dollars to benefit society. Without these tax-supported programs and entities, our country would have no military, no law and order, no public education, no retirement programs for the elderly and the disabled and the poor would have little or no means of surviving.
If a candidate says that their opponent is not fiscally conservative and wants to waste your tax dollars on social programs that add to the national deficit, does that mean that by promoting infrastructure programs that keep our highways, bridges, public hospitals, libraries, government buildings, etc. is not something tax dollars should be used for?
By saying a political opponent cannot be trusted, does that imply that there are actually politicians that can be trusted? That sort of boggles the mind.
Words are cheap and all politicians know that they now have to use negative campaigning, to some extent, to win. Even if a politician is basically an honest person, they know that in order to receive campaign financing from political action committees they will have to take positions that compromise their basic beliefs. They know that if elected, they’re going to have to continue to compromise their core principals by having to work collectively with other politicians whose political views are contrary to theirs.
From here on in, politics is going to be froth with deceit and misinformation. After all, negative campaigning is what wins elections now. Social programs and infrastructure are always going to be entities necessary for the community to thrive. Yet, helping benefit society will heretofore be used as negative campaign rhetoric to make an opponent look like they want to give lazy freeloaders a free ride at the expense of hardworking taxpayers.
One way to fight negative campaigns is for the public to become more cynical and mistrusting of politicians. Unfortunately, that path leads to apathy and low voter turnout. That seems to be our new reality as we froth forward. We’re headed for a future that is froth with mistrust and deceit because it wins elections. Since society has become so advanced, maybe we need to put artificial intelligence in charge of our government and make all of our decisions for us (this last statement is froth with cynicism).