Politics and Religion
In Real Life, I avoid these subjects like the plague since everyone has a strong opinion concerning them and most of the time it does not jibe with mine at all.
But online I’ve met many open-minded individuals with the sensitivity and decorum to have intelligent mature conversations on these matters (mostly due to the fact that I really only frequent a limited number of forums that are designed and regulated to encourage this).
Roy and El have made some interesting comments on politics (see Suggestions) and I am taking this opportunity to try to become one more internet forum that bucks the trend and has rational discussions on senstive topics.
In response to Roy’s observations on political scandal: This is one instance where I see a benefit to increased media coverage and transparency. If enough citizens are informed of the activities our leaders while on the job, we can put measures in place to police them accordingly.
In response to El’s question regarding government run health care: No country’s political organization today is representative of a ‘pure’ system. The most one can say is that the US shares more traits with a democratic system than with a socialist/communist/etc. system. Doesn’t it therefore make sense to take the best features of other systems and tweak them so that we may gain the most benefits from them? This is just another example of why I dislike labels – we shouldn’t refer to our political system as democratic, we should simply call it ‘American’ and just focus on doing what is best for all.
You’re right, the political system should just be called American and tweaked at need… unfortunately, that makes so much sense that I doubt anything resembling that will ever happen (this is politics, after all). Thanks for your opinion, though – I agree with you completely.
Yes! See, I’ve had trouble telling people I know that political systems could be better if we incorporated good bits from other ones, but they just wouldn’t listen.
The only problem is that things might contradict each other, but even that can be resolved eventually.
I agree with El, though. It won’t happen because *sarcasm* Democracy is Perfect, remember? */sarcasm*
I don’t think a democratic political system is necessarily in conflict with ’socialist’ public health and welfare economic programs (e.g. Social Security). The problem is that a democracy can only function in the public interest if the public has free access to a wide range of sources of information and if the public is educated enough to think critically. Sometimes it seems to me that a lot of Americans are only educated in consumerism and believe the political messages that they hear most often and most loudly.
In a democratic political system, we could elect those that profess a conviction that universal, single-payer health-care makes sense, economically and socially. The scandal is that not enough of us can figure out that the insurance companies ‘own’ our elected officials. I’ve e-mailed all of my reps and senators (state and national) to tell them that if they don’t support single-payer, not only will I not vote for them, I will work against them in coming elections. They’ve always written back. Unfortunately, they know that if the lobbyists give them enough $$, they can saturate the media with a slick ad that will get them re-elected, no matter how they vote.
Yipes, I could go on and on. It all comes down to critical thinking by the public. And I don’t mean that if people thought about it, they’d agree with me. I mean, ……well, you probably have an idea what I mean by now.
Oh, Gosh! We haven’t even started on theocracy. Government and religion. What is the Iranian theocracy doing to its flock tonight?
Edd, do you consider strong opinions to be unintelligent and immature? No, of course you don’t. It’s the style of argument, isn’t it? I’m afraid I often offend people when I argue my considered opinions.