I have been thinking a lot about my political stance, particularly on American issues lately, and I have come to the full blown conclusion that calling myself a member of one political party or another is daft and that it really must be the issues that define me, not the parties. So the easiest way I have to do this, is to write a list of the different political issues and my stance on them. Bear in mind and this is most essential: all issues in my opinion are ultimately grey and my own ignorance in most issues will prevent me from reaching absolute wisdom or assurance of my righteousness in any field. Also, all of these issues and things are only reflective of my current feelings upon them. I know that over time my opinions will change and so too would these answers, I only hope to give the best options for the country as I see them now and that my opinion will be the right one in future. One further issue is that many political issues are more complex than a simple against, in support sort of answer, a lot of issues are more a matter of degree of support, or perhaps dealing with things in a different way. I simply write the first words of ‘against’ or ‘in support’ to give a quicker synopsis. If I don’t feel that an issue can be given a simple vote of approval, I’ll either try to elaborate further by breaking down the issue into component parts, qualify the support (i.e. ‘in minor support’), or I’ll omit the approval part of it altogether. So without further ado, here are my political opinions.
Against: I believe that affirmative action assures minorities of their inabilities to get positions based on merit. This is not to say that I do not understand that the point of affirmative action does not have good intentions. As an institution it is a good idea to prevent employers or admissions personnel from keeping minorities or whomever out based upon their own prejudices. I do agree that a government institution should be in place to keep this from occurring, but to install quotas I feel is counteractive to the measure of ultimately insuring equality. This of course is complicated because people will say that without these institutions, which give a boost to minorities, they will be placed on the bottom rungs of society forever. I can not claim to know as much about this as I would like, but I do believe that this claim is erroneous. The evidence of minorities who were given the worst jobs historically, and who rose out of their miserable positions is common, especially in America. The Irish, the Italians, the Chinese etc. I believe that Hispanic culture will be the next to make this leap from the working class immigrants to middle class ordinary Americans. Of course, the exception to this is the Black minority, who have been on this continent for about 400 or more years and as little as 200 (not including recent African immigrants). I do not want to state my opinion upon this subject publicly, but I do want to say that I think the problems of these poor souls is not very blameable on the white man.
Against: this used to be an issue that I was for but with no real good reason why, or more over, lacking knowledge of the subject. I believe that due to the cost of incarceration versus the cost of the death penalty as it is in our current system it is cheaper to imprison someone for life. In addition, I am opposed to the principle of the deliberate killing of people by the government. Now this is also a difficult issue as I have never been in the situation of a victim (or acquaintance of one) of such a heinous crime worthy of the top punishment. I do not think that revenge in this way would be right and I am always a firm believer in forgiveness as a general rule. I simply do not believe there is necessity for such punishments in this day and age. This being said, I may say it is not one of my greater causes to champion and therefore I am generally not moved by it much one way or the other as it is.
In support: but with strong regulation attached, my opinions (emotional and logical) about this obviously differs very much, and to make the assumption that marijuana is a harmless drug is, in my opinion, pure fantasy by those championing its cause. I am not saying that it is that bad of a drug or that it is more harmful than alcohol (which I believe should be as regulated as marijuana so if marijuana is banned, so too should alcohol be). I am saying that marijuana is a bad drug all the same, particularly due to the lack of motivation caused by it, as well as lack of concentration power. My own experimentation with this substance on multiple occasions has perhaps tainted my opinion about it. I do think ultimately that the necessity for more liberty offered with such substances will help in the principles in a free state such as our own.
Against: from my understanding of the situation, I feel that the effort put forth into preventing the contraband importation of drugs into the United States is more or less that of a failure. Again this is a difficult issue in my opinion, as it is impossible to say how much higher the amount of such imports would be with the absence of the war on drugs. I do believe, however that drugs, particularly hard drugs, should be regulated the same here as they are in most western powers in the world, but the prohibition should not be sought after as it is now.
In support: this is perhaps one of my strongest issues of consideration and the one where I have traditionally had the hardest time truly taking a stance. Ultimately, I believe that this comes down to the issue of when life begins combined with is it wrong to take life. To take life, by the general rules of most societies (at least of citizens within the society and not the government) is perhaps the largest single universal sin or taboo and to the effect I am also opposed to the haphazard taking of life in this way. This therefore becomes an issue of semantics defining when a life starts, and that is an issue I personally can not give a good answer to. As this is the case, I do not feel it is my right to try and prohibit abortion or not and consequently I go with the current court decisions upon the matter to a certain extent. If I had to guess I would say that life as we define it begins when a fetus is capable of living independently outside of the womb. My personal opinion, due to my exceedingly ignorant knowledge of fetal gestation, is that it seems that abortion should be permitted up until the final trimester of pregnancy. As far as issues like partial-birth abortion, I am extremely opposed emotionally to them, and mostly opposed to them logically, failing to comprehend the necessity of such a long wait to abort as opposed to having done this in the first two trimesters, again this may simply be the result of ignorance.
In support: but of a certain and specific kind. This is an issue that I have had a good deal of contact with lately, living in England presently, and travelling about many countries more socialised than the UK in general. I have come to the conclusion that it would be much to the benefit of society at large to provide basic health care for all of its citizens. The largest problem with this is the lack of competition and therefore the general apathy of the health care industry in general. I feel that the best way to get around this is to, as I said offer the health care for the absolute basic requirements, and then have a sort of competitive system, whereby one still has insurance and get premium care much like today. This is my solution, and of course it is a preliminary idea, but I simply think of this the same way that public schools are set up in the US.
In support: I believe that in spite of the popular romantic notions of what marriage ought to be for (love only) it is in reality an economic agreement and pact between people, at least according to government concern, meaning for taxes. Also, it is my opinion that the historical reason for marriage, meaning to raise a family with, is now leaving its potence and meaning anyway, one has only to look at modern divorce rates. I do believe, however that marriage should be legally defined as the union between either one man and one woman or two consenting adults (of any gender), because from this issue I fear that perversions are indeed possible stemming ultimately from the legalisation of homosexual marriage specifically. Whenever speaking with people about this, I get the feeling that they do not understand this potential because they think that it will only go this far (homosexual marriage) and then stop. I realise that most people lack the very real knowledge of historic precedence that this issue carries (in terms of non traditional marriage), but one has only to look at the first white settlers of Utah to understand what I mean. These people, the Mormons, went out west to practice their seemingly strange religion without being hassled, and part of their religion of the time included polygamy, one has only to study the very basics of Brigham Young, who had something on the order of 27 wives and was the first governor of that territory and state. This amount of plural wives was and is very taboo in American society and it was quickly banned, and the LDS church also banned it because of the popular sentiment against it. So, in conclusion it is not unlikely for certain groups to abuse, or use marriage in wholly unorthodox or unacceptable ways. I have no problem with homosexual relationships per se, but to sanctify them by order of the government is a right they should be granted as much as any other adult relationship has the same right... I do believe truly that this should be defined legally and incorporated into the law but I warn against further demands of civil rights by less mainstream of groups, such as pederasts, polygamy practitioners, beastophiles and so forth.
In support: this is an issue that I feel the US must be more open on in general as the basis for the US in many ways is a country that has open arms to immigration or at least has historically. I believe that the bulk of people who come here willingly within a few generations usually rise up in status and achieve equality with the rest of us. Of course, the big issue these days for us is Mexican immigration. While I believe that Mexicans should be allowed by and large to immigrate to this country somewhat freely, I do think that they should do it legally and through the government. It is my opinion that to curb the problem of rampant and unchecked immigration, we should help out the Mexican government to stabilize itself and achieve far greater economic prosperity for its people on the whole. I also believe that illegal immigrants should not be granted many of the same amnesties and programs as regular citizens and legal immigrants. I say this because the illicit nature of their presence should not guarantee them services that they in essence don’t pay for, or don’t obligate them for.
Against: this is one of my longest standing and most sensitive issues personally. I feel that censorship, in any form is fundamentally wrong to a forward moving society. It holds back thought, and to me thought is sacred and never immoral or wrong. Deeds on the other hand can be, but that is a different matter. I feel that free speech, free expression and free thoughts are essential to being human and to forbid such things forbids a person’s human essence. I know this may sound a little passionate, but I am firmly of the belief that no one has the right not to be offended. If one feels offended they simply shouldn’t listen. Naturally whenever one speaks freely, there will be consequences, and these may be quite adverse, but they should still have the right to bring on these consequences in the first place.
Against: Now living in a second country, Korea, outside of the United States, I have had many opportunities to see and consider anti-American sentiments in a much more personal and open way. I’m certainly aware of the resentment that the United States has suffered abroad and even from some of its harshest critics (American Ex-Pats), but I feel that the US is going about dealing with these unfavorable feelings in a very poor way. The United States is sadly a far too aggressive place, as seen domestically (through the staggering crime statistics) and abroad (through the US’s foreign policy of the past sixty years). Now I don’t mean to say I don’t understand or accept the reality of real politik, but it is rather bothersome all the same. I am fully aware that people and especially nations work on a basis of finance and capital, and always have.
This all said, I believe that there are a few things America can do, that would significantly improve our worldwide reputation, while still allowing us the ability to maintain our high standards of living and influence and authority everywhere. I’m not suggesting they’ll be easy, but I do believe they’re certainly possible. One such thing is to stop supporting questionable and hated allies (namely Israel, which I’ll discuss more in that section), another thing is to stop nation building, it doesn’t work from what I know, and it’s not our place to do such things anyway. Another thing is for America to intensely educate itself on a whole and promote more exposure to the world as a whole. This, I think would make us more aware of the struggles of all nations and thus more sympathetic to them. This is all leading to the actual opinion of the ‘war on terror’. Now I agree that there are rogue groups with great followings out in the world, particularly in the Middle East. It is my belief that we should attend to them in the same way that the Clinton administration did by treating them as crimes, rather than acts of war. Wars are things that are fought between two sovereign powers, but resistance groups such as Al Quaeda are not sovereignties, and should be treated criminally, with appropriate force.
The other concern I have about this, is one of near indignation at the role this particular issue has taken in our current history as of October 2007. What I mean is, this issue is far too overblown, since terrorism doesn’t really affect most Americans on a day to day basis, and I’m guessing probably won’t for a very long time to come. The fact that the American dollar is currently dropping like mad (primarily from the current war in Iraq), or that education is significantly lacking is far more important, really, to the American psyche than what a few yahoos in Pakistan are doing. I’m not saying there should be no attention paid to it whatsoever, but it appears to be the only concern of the current administration (I’m speaking somewhat hyperbolically, obviously) and that is really missing the track in my opinion. Thus, I believe we should use the necessary force to defend ourselves and prevent future attacks, but I think we can ultimately win the ‘war on terror’ psychologically by improving our worldwide reputation, and not simply trying to rule through force of arms in the same violent terrorist mentality.
Opposed: Every time I see or hear anything about this war, it saddens me, because I feel it is such a failure and a move of bold unnecessary aggression on the part of the United States. I’m afraid it has and will leave a black stain on our reputation for many nations for at least few generations. I believe it is a war primarily of material acquisition and also one of the neo-conservative’s top agenda to nation build. It has accomplished nothing but creating much predicted chaos in a region full of enough turmoil and anti-western sentiment as it is. It is supporting a questionable ally, Israel, by knocking out its biggest opponent in the region. The mentioned reasons for going to war in the first place are shaky at best, and I think enough has been written on why the war there is wholly bad and worthless. The bigger question at present is where to proceed now with the mess caused. I personally, really don’t know, save to say that our meddling is not doing much to help or stabilize the country as it is, I believe it would be in our best interest to retire our military gradually from the region, other than withdrawing from Iraq, I really wouldn’t know what to do, or results to expect. Also, I think it would be in our greatest interest currently to try and improve the United States’ reputation with the stronger Islamic nations in the region and try to gain their support to settle things. This is one I must confess, I just truly don’t know what to do there now.
This is another issue that I’m not totally sure of all the facts on, but think we should certainly do more to look at and preserve. The environment is obviously wholly important if we are to sustain life, I think one thing that we must consider is the importance that it has on our own lives. I know that many great strides have been taken to protect the environment, but as I see it, the real issue lies again in money and profit. I believe that a lot of the solution to our environmental problems rests in two things. One, we must be willing to separate with a little of our money, in order to improve the overall quality of life for all beings on the Earth. This includes giving higher foreign aides and better technologies to poorer nations, as well as helping them improve their economies as much as possible. I’m not saying I have all the answers here, but I do think it should be a more prominent issue for those in power. Also, we should spend more time and effort filtering the pollutants we put into the ecosystem, which leads me to my next suggestion. We should cut off environmental waste by trying to develop better technologies and implementing them (like the electric car)… America should take a leading role in this, and be the developer of great new things as we once were, it is only right and useful. Additionally, if we do develop better technologies (particularly concerning energy efficiency) this will make the further benefit of decreasing our dependence on foreign powers, specifically the OPEC nations.
Opposed: I am aware of America’s need to defend herself, but I feel that the military is and has been used far too much like an imperial fighting force for the past fifty years, than simply a force for self defense. I do realize and understand our need to protect our trade and other interests abroad, and for that matter our need to defend our allies, and occasionally even our need to promote our economic interests, I’m not naïve nor idealistic about such things. But I think we try to use our military as too much of a bargaining chip, and not only doesn’t it breed resentment, but it also breeds increased debt and expense. I have the greatest respect for the American military and the soldiers who serve in it, and feel they should be paid adequately for they’re service. I also am quite content to maintain the further advancement in military technology to maintain the lives and fighting power of our soldiers, but I suppose what I’m really opposed to, is using our forces unnecessarily for things like the ‘war on terror’ and the Iraqi war. I believe we should pick our military actions much more conservatively and for the vast majority of the time, only defend ourselves, not implement our way of thinking on some other region of the world that does not support it, or us.
Opposed: I find gun control to be wholly pointless and ineffective. I know there has been a great deal of discussion and I doubt I’ll make any points anyone else hasn’t already (as is probably true with all political issues), but I do find it necessary to mention how useless the idea is. Now obviously there needs to be a certain extant of gun control (in the same way there needs to be alcohol control). I am quite aware of America’s internal violence, although I’ve never personally been exposed to it, thankfully, but really think that the mentality that you can prevent people from using guns by stopping the guns is absurd to me. Criminals have guns and will have guns later if we ban them. The manufacture of guns is and will remain quite high, and the amount of guns currently owned, legally and otherwise is outrageously high. Personally, I think education is a good answer to some of the problem, but moreover, I think disarming the public at large only exposes them to more danger from those intent on harming them. I’m not saying accidents don’t or wouldn’t happen, but the proportion of accidents that do happen compared to the nation at large is statistically insignificant. The real way to combat the problem of violence, in my opinion is to change a good deal of the culture and the mentality to resort to violence as a means of solving problems. I firmly believe that if you armed law abiding citizens, and educated them on what they were doing with their weapons, the amount of non-personal crime (i e non- domestic violence) would plummet, or at least only remain the same. If people can defend themselves, they are less likely to be harmed or taken advantage of by those illegally carrying weapons. All this said, I must point out, that I personally loathe guns, I am not a fanatic by any means, I’ve never owned a gun in my life, and don’t feel entirely comfortable around them, but I do think that trying to control them is ineffectual.
This is not so much of a political issue, as a major reason for a lot of our current political issues, and something that I think people should be more aware. The United States’ unwavering support of Israel, is and has been since the 1970’s a major cause of discontentment with the United States at large, especially in the Middle East. I feel that a great deal of the reason we are now in Iraq, possibly to go into Iran and even Syria next is for this country’s protection. The United States government has donated a quarter of our foreign aide budget to this country, when it is about as economically sound as Spain. Almost the entirety of the funds goes into Israeli defense, even though it is clearly the strongest nation in the region militarily, and the only known nuclear power there. Israel, in my mind, represents a total corruption of American politics toward a not altogether pious, or even particularly supportive ally. The support of Israel has alienated us from the other nations in the region, with the slight exception of Saudi Arabia and Egypt, two governments who I wouldn’t be proud to be associated with. I believe the Arabic nations could be strong allies and strong trade partners if we only treated them fairly and well. Historically, these nations have been very advanced for the ages, up until the modern era, and it is shameful that we ostracize them, simply by supporting a country that no longer needs it. I wish no harm to Israel or its people, but I do wish we’d simply withdraw our support of them altogether, or at least as much as we support any other average nation, and leave them to fight their own battles, if they are indeed embattled.
In strong support: I am appalled at the American education’s statistics of improvement, and moreover simply dealing with the educational standards in the United States today. I feel that part of the problem in this is the lack of competition in the school system, and the lack of care that teachers are guaranteed by the idea of tenure and job security. I feel that the best way to deal with this problem is to somewhat privatize education and let parents, and perhaps later students choose where they wish to attend school. I believe this sort of choice will give far better results than the idea of a monopolistic school system without any true incentive to do better. So long as educational standards are still being taught, I feel that this will rapidly make not only our youth smarter and better able to deal with the world, but also I feel it could make them overall more successful people. I feel that education is immensely important for the nation to not only survive, but to thrive in the world at large. I frankly can’t understand why people are opposed to this idea at all, besides that it might cut funding slightly. I don’t adhere to, nor can I find good logic in the idea that dumping more money into education somehow improves the quality. I can personally testify to this as a teacher in Korea. Korea spends more money on ESL than any other country in the world, but gets among the worst test scores. The problems with Korea’s particular situation is not entirely a financial one, but the roots are based in other factors I won’t get into here, suffice it to say, that choice whether in a phone company, car, or education is far better than none.
Affirmative Action
Capitol Punishment
Drugs
Abortion
Socialised Health
Homosexual Marriage
Immigration
Censorship
Welfare
Terrorism
The War in Iraq
The Environment
Military Spending
Gun Control
Israel
School Vouchers
Affirmative Action
Capitol Punishment
Drugs
1) The legalisation of drugs in general and particularly marijuana
2) The drug war
Abortion
Socialised Health
Homosexual Marriage
Immigration
Censorship-
Welfare-
Mostly against: I feel that welfare is a tricky issue, and it is somewhat difficult to figure out who needs it and who doesn’t. I believe in the hard work ethic (a quality I sadly don’t possess myself) and that anyone is capable of making anything of himself through this ethic. At the same time, I realize that chance has a greater role to play than we’d like to give it credit. I, personally have been fortunate enough to be blessed with many opportunities and privileges and haven’t needed the use of the system, so can not really gripe against those who do. On the other hand, I do believe that a system such as this can and does breed lethargy and laziness as a simple result of giving people something for nothing. People are bound to try and exploit any system or possibility (so has been my experience and understanding). I guess the greater issue at stake is how much does socialism really contribute to the individual. As a temporary support, I feel welfare can be good and I’m sure that many or most people who use it are in essence good and genuinely want to be free of their dependency. I do not suggest the government, nor its people should be unsympathetic to the unfortunate or those who have fallen on hard times, especially for those less able to provide for themselves, such as children, the infirm, or the elderly, but I do think creating a state where people rely on the government too much, can be tyrannous, not to mention inefficient over time.
Terrorism-
The War in Iraq-
The Environment-
Military Spending-
Gun Control-
Israel-
School Vouchers-
Homepage
Huginn Muninn
Contact Page