«

»

Mar 13 2016

Power Corrupts the People Too

power to the people

By Ramy Osman
March 2016

I wrote this poem in 2013, two years after the uprisings in the Arab world. It was also two years after the Occupy Movement was born in New York City. These grassroots movements were generally started by people who were politically marginalized and who had little to no political influence. But they all wanted to end “corruption”.

There was a lot of potential in the movements; But the end results were not what people expected. Some of the movements had limited success, others had no success. Some movements led to the rise of a new political class, while others simply saw the repackaging of the old political class. In all cases, the revolutions and democracy movements were co-opted, compromised, or sabotaged by both internal and external factors; In other words their dreams and plans were corrupted. What seemed like a united front, was in reality a mirage. Peoples demand for political change was in reality an un-admitted quest for power. And when people seek power (whether they admit that they’re seeking power or not), it just causes more corruption. It will corrupt one person, and it will similarly corrupt a group of people.

Political movements might be united in their beginning phase. But they eventually split up, and the marginalized groups are left feeling jealous or critical of the faction that rose to the top. People set themselves up so that they’re in a constant state of opposition ; and sometimes that opposition ends up including people they used to be united with. So the idea of “power to the people ” is relative. And instead of people really wanting “power to the people “, they end up just wanting power for themselves.

2016 being a US presidential election year, means that people in the US will be once again drawn into dreams of power for “their people” –  whoever they define “their people” to be. People will inflate their grievances and they will ride those grievances to power. And so I question the concept of “Power to the People”. What “power” are you talking about, and what “people” are you talking about? How far are you willing to go to assert your claim to power? And what monsters, internal or external, will you contribute to creating during that quest for power? …

 

Power to the People
by Ramy Osman


Power to the people, a cliché that never will

Inspires when you hear it, but an ideal you can’t fulfill

At first you might unite, on utopian good will

But people will fall back, into a group or a social shill

Their priorities always change, never at a standstill

And only one group can win, and practice their free will

While the others have to struggle, and battle uphill

To deceive themselves into power, a self righteous communal ill

Call it democracy, revolution, or whatever you will

But in the end greed and ego will triumph, creating a social landfill

Of the worst human characteristics, even leading some to kill

Where the truthful is discarded, and the liar is a million dollar bill

Where creating enemies is a delusional thrill

And the cult of personality is swallowed like a pill

It’s the nature of seeking power, and political skill

It’s a chronic human condition, ensuring blood will always spill

Power to the people, a cliche that’s misunderstood

Now this is where we reflect, and change the narrative as we should

 

 

3 comments

  1. Phillip Slepian

    Ramy – I cannot disagree with most of your reply. Of course, I am familiar with Lord Acton’s quote, and agree with it entirely. That’s why I think the Founding Fathers created the Republic as they did – to try and place limits on power. Sadly, most of their safegaurds have been steamrollered over by the Progressives over the past century.

    While sometimes, well-meaning mevements get co-opted, in the case of Move-On, Black Lives, and others, following the money will clearly show that they were created by those seeking power through undemocratic means and use the useful idiot youth and the UN to advance their goals of consolidated power.

    By Jihadists, I refer to no specific segment, but merely to any Muslim who seeks Islamic world hegemony, via violence or non-violence. As a good Muslim, that probably includes you, right, Ramy?

  2. Phillip Slepian

    Oh, dear. And I thought Ramy was a Muslim Libertarian who supports free markets. Anarchy? Really, Ramy? Ramy needs to follow the money. He, and the thousands of useful idiots of the so-called 99%, are being unwittingly directed and funded by wealthy globalists like George Soros (via MoveOn.org) and many others. The goal of these elites is not just some “power to the people” overthrowing of Western governments, but the amalgamation of massive, undemocratic power in the hands of a very few. Google Agenda 21 and similar UN programs. These “social and economic justice” movements are all designed to eliminate national identities, economies, borders and cultures, and place that power in the hands of the UN, which will redistribute wealth from those nations that have to those that do not, but I am sure a very large chunk of that wealth will end up in the pockets of Soros and his cabal. There are those who understand this agenda, like Bill Ayers, and hide its true goals from the ignorant youth who stage their sit-ins and demonstrate (often for pay). Read Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” and you will see the step-by-step plan (which will rob mankind of any true liberty) being implemented by groups like Occupy and Black Lives Matter. These organizations have nothing to do with liberty, and everything to do with tyranny.

    I suppose, Ramy, that you think that these groups will do Jihad’s dirty work for you so the Jihadists can swoop in at the end and place the Caliph at the head of this New World Order (just like the Mullahs used the naive Iranian Left to overthrow the Shah). Perhaps, but do not assume that everyone, everywhere, will quietly submit without a fight. Gates of Vienna, anyone?

    1. ramy

      Phil, you have bad reading and comprehension skills. The point of my article and poem is to say that all popular movements are co-opted in some way; And that power corrupts people , especially political power. I wonder if you’re familiar with the famous quote from Lord Acton “Power corrupts.. and absolute power corrupts absolutely”.. that’s the point. So why would you disagree with that and go on another one of your delusional rants.
      You seem to think that popular movements are co-opted because they’re designed that way. There might be a little truth to that. But a bigger reason why they’re co-opted is because human nature dictates that power corrupts people who seek after it. So whatever mantra or grievance people want to ride in their pursuit of power, the end result will always be corruption and evil.
      And what “jihadists” are you talking about? ISIS?? hahaha!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 characters remaining (Comments are limited to 2000 characters. Approx 300 words)