I'm shocked to see Barack Obama and Mitt Romney so close to each other on the scale. I'm also surprised that I am so far away from Barack Obama, because I thought he represented my views a lot better than this test would indicate. I knew he wasn’t the extreme socialist liberal many people say he is, but I didn’t think he was a right-wing fascist! I’ve been hearing about how polarized our country has become, with the two parties growing further and further apart. The Republican and Democratic Parties seem so different from each other when you look at their platforms and consider how much time they spend fighting each other. I was beginning to feel rather comfortable thinking of myself as a Democrat and an Obama supporter, but this test makes me wonder. Perhaps this is a case of actions speaking louder than words, and they don’t represent me as well as I thought they did.
I was aware that the military is an area where I differ strongly from Barack Obama. However, it’s hard for me to imagine anyone getting elected who is anywhere near my opinions on that front. I think the amount of money our country spends on the military is obscene, especially when I consider what that money could be spent on instead, like education, healthcare, and reducing our national debt. Also, the havoc our military wreaks in other countries, especially on civilians, horrifies me. I don’t understand why we need to cause so much destruction in the name of “freedom” or whatever the hell we’re supposed to be fighting for. It makes me so sad to think about the lives that are ruined at the hands of US citizens who think they are somehow doing a good thing and "serving their country."
This experience doesn’t make me reconsider my vote. I will definitely still vote for Obama (even though Kentucky is such a red state it won't make a difference) and tend to vote Democrat in general. I want to vote for one of the two major parties in races where there's a possibility of either major party candidate winning. It's more a matter of voting against the one I disagree with most. One reason I support President Obama is that I’m happy that he and his party have come out in support for gay marriage. Marriage may be outdated and irrelevant for many couples, but it’s clearly wrong in my eyes to have certain legal benefits offered to heterosexual couples and denied to homosexual couples. I think it’s discrimination, plain and simple.
It is helpful to know the names of some other people on the diagram that the political test provided. I don't think every thoughtful person would agree with where they put people on the diagram, but at least it's a place to start. Now that I have an idea of where people lie on the political scale, I can read more about the different political philosophies they represent. For example, I want to read some works by Nelson Mandela because I see he can be called a left libertarian like me. It would be interesting to explore this political philosophy more deeply in the context of South Africa's history. I'm especially interested in Mandela because he's the only person shown in the left libertarian quarter of the diagram to serve in political office. Since Barack Obama may not represent my views as well as I thought, I'd like to see an example of a political leader of a government who may more closely represent my views.
"My Understanding of Anarchism 3.0" describes Michael Benton's personal political philosophy that falls under the broad term anarchism. From what I can tell, this particular definition of anarchism corresponds strongly to the term left libertarian, so I am personally interested in learning more about this type of anarchism. I have heard many times from teachers and textbooks that anarchy basically means no government and chaos. Consequently, when someone suggested I read about anarchist economics, I wasn't very interested. I didn't see how anarchy could relate to my world, in which government is very present and necessary. Now I've been given an entirely different definition of anarchism and I find it intriguing. This description of anarchism has to do with community action, which is something I'm very interested in. In fact, Barack Obama's description of being a community organizer in his book Dreams from My Father was what really sold me on him as a president who could represent my values. As a community organizer, he encouraged people who thought they had no voice to take action to change their community in ways they wanted. Obviously, it would be better for someone who belongs to the community to play this role, but I think sometimes marginalized people get so used to being ignored that they give up and accept it as the status quo. They think no matter how hard they try, they won't win. Unfortunately in many cases they are right. It seems that money and power rule the world, unless there is a large enough group of people being obnoxious enough that they can't be ignored. This reminds me of the music video we saw in class of the student protests in Wisconsin about the teachers' union, when people were chanting so loudly and incessantly that it must have been hard to get work done in that government building. It was inspirational to see an example of people caring so much about something that they will unite across barriers of age and status to make their voices heard. If that's what anarchism is, I do want to read and hear more about it.
It is helpful to know the names of some other people on the diagram that the political test provided. I don't think every thoughtful person would agree with where they put people on the diagram, but at least it's a place to start. Now that I have an idea of where people lie on the political scale, I can read more about the different political philosophies they represent. For example, I want to read some works by Nelson Mandela because I see he can be called a left libertarian like me. It would be interesting to explore this political philosophy more deeply in the context of South Africa's history. I'm especially interested in Mandela because he's the only person shown in the left libertarian quarter of the diagram to serve in political office. Since Barack Obama may not represent my views as well as I thought, I'd like to see an example of a political leader of a government who may more closely represent my views.
"My Understanding of Anarchism 3.0" describes Michael Benton's personal political philosophy that falls under the broad term anarchism. From what I can tell, this particular definition of anarchism corresponds strongly to the term left libertarian, so I am personally interested in learning more about this type of anarchism. I have heard many times from teachers and textbooks that anarchy basically means no government and chaos. Consequently, when someone suggested I read about anarchist economics, I wasn't very interested. I didn't see how anarchy could relate to my world, in which government is very present and necessary. Now I've been given an entirely different definition of anarchism and I find it intriguing. This description of anarchism has to do with community action, which is something I'm very interested in. In fact, Barack Obama's description of being a community organizer in his book Dreams from My Father was what really sold me on him as a president who could represent my values. As a community organizer, he encouraged people who thought they had no voice to take action to change their community in ways they wanted. Obviously, it would be better for someone who belongs to the community to play this role, but I think sometimes marginalized people get so used to being ignored that they give up and accept it as the status quo. They think no matter how hard they try, they won't win. Unfortunately in many cases they are right. It seems that money and power rule the world, unless there is a large enough group of people being obnoxious enough that they can't be ignored. This reminds me of the music video we saw in class of the student protests in Wisconsin about the teachers' union, when people were chanting so loudly and incessantly that it must have been hard to get work done in that government building. It was inspirational to see an example of people caring so much about something that they will unite across barriers of age and status to make their voices heard. If that's what anarchism is, I do want to read and hear more about it.
No comments:
Post a Comment