An Interview on American Political History
An interview conducted with Gary Bieniewicz on May 8th, 2023, revealed that many aspects of America’s political history have drastically changed since the 1960s, yet some identifiable constants remain. To be politically active in America today contrives controversy, whereas fifty years ago these conditions were inapplicable. Voting used to be seen as a patriotic duty, yet today any form of political advocation determines one’s social volatility. To part from the herd by today’s standard results largely in ostracization and removal from society. Part of this comes from the dissatisfaction of the people due to the misuse of action taking place within our government. In order to vote against the artificially procured consumer narrative of deception, one must flee to the outskirts of civilization, or be forced to observe the liberal destruction of their own community from afar. To advocate a Republican candidate in the one-party state of New York, one becomes subject to perverse actions of depravity and other humanist tactics of suppression.
The interview revealed that throughout the 70s, 80s, and 90s citizens voted more about the policy and less about the candidate's social principles. So long as a candidate was honest, it did not seem to matter what side of the fence they rested their worldviews. Today, a mere affiliation with partisanship, places an individual at risk for persecution, magnified by the polarization of special interest propaganda. Another lost yet vital component of a beneficial symbiosis between government and man is the conscious weighted value placed on the taxpayer. Although, by this measure, today the average constituent is held in little regard when compared to letterpress printing. Rather than solving actual problems, politicians of today just sign off to print more dollars, weakening the nation. While biases have also existed in Newspapers across the nation, throughout the past fifty years, Democratic politicians have been just as capable as Republican ones. With special-interest collusion, many politicians of today have been bought out, acting as demagogues in order to gain voter consent. It is after gaining these revered positions in office that the compromised politician is activated, and amassed in contribution to the global agenda of new world change. Rather than focus policy on our domestic needs, today’s politicians work in tandem with the media to distract their own constituents, relying on public accommodations to secure the justification they need to establish a state of unrivaled lawlessness.
Term Limits have been notoriously avoided and exploited to ensure the deep state players remain in power, and able to pedal influence among aspiring candidates wishing to join the globalist entourage. One thing that is unseen from any Presidential candidate in the history of modern politics, is the humility to impose restrictions on various branches of government, rather than exerting the maximum allowed force under Constitutional law. It has become apparent that the federal government cares not for the working-class citizen, but indeed follows their own agenda. As a result, constituents are thwarted from their God-given right to fair governance.
The interview provides evidence that politicians previously exhibited acts of merit to the public in the form of needed legislative revisions, ushering participation from their constituency in exchange for visible Congressional action. Instead, today’s politicians hide behind the party to evade the clear malice and manipulation of the American system to work in their favor, apart from the progress of the taxpayer. It appears that the taxpayer has become less important in the days of print-money-on-demand, among other things. This interview exposes the lack of governance that faces America, as crime runs rampant and politicians avoid their responsibilities, instead focusing on building their own personal wealth. The conclusion explains that legislative intervention is the best-held declaration against tyranny. In order to save our nation from a despotic fate is to create policy that favors the people, and place checks to balance and regulate politicians’ potential for systemic abuse.
Oral History Interview: (Full Transcript) - May 8th, 2023
JM - Jordan Muhsin
GB - Gary Bieniewicz
JM 0:04
"All right. So this is pretty much my first interview."
GB 0:10
"The last time I was interviewed. I was getting my hair cut up in the Bronx. With a Girl going to college, and the political science, things like that. She asked me questions of me and the barber."
JM
“Wow! [Laughing] Well, could you state your name for the record, please?”
GB 0:28
"Gary Bieniewicz"
JM 0:31
“All right, and could you tell us a little bit about yourself?”
GB 0:34
"I'm a male, I answer to Gary. [Laughing] I'm 72 years old, and I'm currently a resident of Florida, and I also hang out in old Lyme, Connecticut.”
JM 0:49
"All right now What first got you interested in politics?"
GB 0:55
“Well, I grew up in a middle-class family, and I thought I learned my political conversations at the dinner table. People would talk about–-I had three older siblings, and they would talk about politics with my mom and dad, and I was a baby in a family so I would listen and form my own opinions.”
JM 1:18
“Wow, were they Democrats or were they Republicans, your family?”
GB 1:21
“Well, then I think mostly Democrats.”
JM:
“Oh, very cool. Now what was the first election you voted in?”
GB:
“Let's see. I turned 21 in [counting] 1971 or so. So I want to say, maybe Nixon.”
JM:
“Okay. And now you have you always voted Republican?”
GB:
"No."
JM:
"What was your voting history like?"
GB 1:55
"Voting history? “
JM:
"Yeah"
GB:
"Basically, from election to election, it depends on the candidate really,"
JM 2:02
"Since Nixon [stammering] who has been the politicians that you have voted for?”
GB 2:08
“Oh, now you're testing me. Okay, the memory isn't quite what it was. Let's see, you had Nixon, then you had Kennedy, and Kennedy won actually, and then they had Johnson and then voted for Johnson, and fought the war on crime, and then after him...”
JM 2:34
“Then in 1976, there was Carter versus Ford.”
GB 2:41
“Carter vs Ford...and I guess Carter won!”
JM 2:44
“Yes. And then in 1980, it was Carter versus Reagan. How did you feel about that election?”
GB 2:52
“I thought Reagan was more popular that Carter because he was while he was seemed like an honest fella, we were experiencing high inflation, and I didn't think he [Carter] had a handle on the economy.”
JM 3:13
“Help me understand what it was like at the time to be a voting Republican.”
GB 3:20
“Well, as at the time when I would say I wasn't strictly voting as a Republican, I was originally registered as a Democrat, along with that my family and we really it wasn't an issue what policy when you were supporting, it was who you voted for.”
JM 3:42
“Do you feel that it's become more or less appropriate to engage in political discussions today as opposed to in the Reagan election?”
GB 3:54
“Well, political discussion now, if you disagree with the Biden camp right now, you're basically labeled as a racist, and I find that offensive, and I think right now, there is no civility with political process. Right now when you have a Congress voting lockstep by party to pass bills, and they don't want to give anybody credit for passing a bill, it seems like they vote against everything, as opposed to for things.”
JM 4:38
“I agree with you there. Do you think we have an honest government?”
GB 4:44
“Well, I don't know about honesty. I think people––I think term limits are a good thing. And when you have somebody in office 50 years, they know every trick in the book, and process money, by the way they go about doing things. Is our government honest? I have a hard time trusting the government right now.”
JM 5:17
“I agree with you. Now, historically, who is your favorite politician and why?”
GB 5:24
“Favorite politician? Well, I liked Kennedy. I thought he was he was charismatic. Although, in hindsight when you hear about his personal life and things like that...at the time the excitement of going to the moon, what we learned about the Bay of Pigs, I thought at the time he was charismatic.”
JM 5:51
“Now, what do you make of people today that say we need to give the government more programs? Have more government programs, and defund the police?”
GB 6:06
“Well, basically, big government is what we have right now. And when I look at the inflation rate I don't see Congress passing legislation, I just see people passing executive orders and the executive orders are what's controlling everything right now. Can you repeat the question?”
JM 6:33
“Yes, what do you make of when people say we need to defund the police? How do you feel about that statement?”
GB 6:43
“Well, to defund the police department means that you have no confidence in the police department. And I don't hear anybody talking about defunding the fire department. I mean, you do have fires. And you have firemen putting it out. You do have crime, and the police are the ones who respond to the criminal activity. So I don't agree with it. I think we need a police department that is out of control of politicians. [Laughing] So basically, you just don't know what to think as far as their reasoning for that, it doesn't make sense to me. The riots and stuff like that they found it was just easier to, I think there was Mayor de Blasio, to give out plywood and let the stores cover their––I didn't think that was a good idea.”
“You ever go and look at Europe when people–protesters throw firebombs, at the police and they have these shields these clear plastic shields, so they don't get sprayed with the fire? I don't think it should come to that. Before they are allowed to try to burn you, I think at least rubber bullets would slow them down and or something like that some sort of retaliation, but to have lawlessness that mean––Here you have this guy who was choked out on the subway. And nobody needed to be killed. They say nobody needs to be killed. And I don't think the intention was to kill a guy, it was to stop him from hurting people. How they treat that, I hate to say it but you've got people like Reverend Al Sharpton he comes out of the woodwork, here's a guy who doesn't pay his taxes, he doesn't seem to me to be a real reverend, but more of a political activist, but he turns around is convicting the guy already. You can't get a fair trial with those kinds of things. They don't seem to want to work with the system, they want to change the system.”
JM 8:55
“I agree. Now I just have two more questions for you here. What do you feel the future holds for America?”
GB 9:07
“Well right now, the future depending on your age––for me,––they feel that the future of America is changing, because you don't seem to respect the taxpayer as the taxpayers. I remember my parents, when I was a kid listening to them, they'd always complain and talk politics, because that was what it was affecting them. And I kind of feel that America has to decide what they want. You can't change the Supreme Court. I don't think it's a good idea to try and prosecute the Supreme Court. I don't think it's a good idea to prosecute opponents in the election. For that reason, now, I think we should swing the other way, the pendulum has swung one way. I think the pendulum might want to swing back the other way. Just like there are checks and balances.”
JM 10:21
“You make a good point. My final question for you is what do you personally want to see more of in the next President of the United States of America?”
GB 10:34
“Well, I, the next President of the United States of America, should be younger, should have his agenda, as opposed to a political party's agenda, and should be honest enough to possibly go after term limits. I don't think politicians should be allowed to do inside trading with Wall Street, I believe that a politician shouldn't be given pension, Social Security for serving one term of office. I think it should be an honor to serve in the government, and not a steppingstone to wealth, at this point in time. How's that?”
JM 11:27
“Perfect. And I agree with that statement very much.”
GB 11:31
“Well, that's good. That's good.”
JM 11:33
“Well, thank you very much for your time today, Gary. It was a pleasure talking to you about politics.”
[END OF TRANSMISSION]