Monday, August 11, 2008
Uncertainty and Politics
I am going to discuss this in a very mediocre format, so bear with me. Americans dwell within a democratic society where our votes can largely shape the structure which in we live. Of course, we are not used to dealing with issues from day to day, and probably only use our democratic powers when we vote once every four years for our president. We probably rarely, if ever, communicate with our elected officials. However, when it comes to voting for our President and issues that spike our interest more than usual (for instance, the recent developments regarding same sex marriage), how do we decide where to vote when we are not happy with either sides of an issue, or are not certain where to vote? As for myself, I doubt pretty much everything I get the chance to think about. That will probably include this post when I am done writing it. So how do I (when I am pompous enough to believe, and probably wrongly so, that I think on certain issues more than the average Joe or Jane that votes) vote on issues that I am uncertain about? Should I let many others who do not make thoughtful decisions choose the outcome? Is not voting really accurate of my view if I care very much about the issue? I don't believe we can trust on what "we feel good about." There are many decisions that I think may have been the right decision but I felt or still feel insecurity about. Marriage was one of them, but I do not think that was the wrong decision. I think we often have competing claims made upon us, and choosing one is to the exclusion of the other, and so we are bound to feel some insecurity for excluding the other claim which had good to it. So what to do? Do we pick to stay the course? In other words, when we are not certain about a topic, ought we stick with the original position if the alternative is a radical departure? Of course with non-radical departures, we would be more willing to give and take. Hmm... thoughts are appreciated. I am sure this is a difficult issue regardless of when it takes place, and there is no perfect way to follow it out.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I think that sometimes it's hard for me to not have an escape. Meaning that when I have to choose something that eliminates all other options, I get more hesitant to make the choice. I find that this tends to happen more often with weightier decisions (what will my career be, who will I marry) than with small ones (what to eat tonight, what book to read).
As for whether or not to stay the course, I think that depends on the decision and what it would mean to depart from the original choice.
And as for the voting conundrum, count me in, too. I don't really like either presidential candidate that well, and don't feel like I can throw myself behind either of them. So is it better for me to just not vote, and to not complain for the next four years?
I'd imagine you're correct that you probably do think about the issues more than the average American. I mean the amount of people that vote in elections is ridiculously low, even in presidential elections. It's kind of funny because everybody decides to be so incredibly critical of everything in politics but yet they refuse to do something as simple as cast a vote to make a difference. Of course the other problem I see with the idea you're exploring, is yes, we are left with one decision or the other when it comes to politics in so many of the cases. Really the only exception is sometimes with candidates, but even then that's not always the case. However, it seemed like most of this discussion was about the idea of issues and legislation rather than specific candidates. So you mention the idea of not having a third alternative as being somewhat disheartening, but there's a major problem with that idea. In the case of legislation, there's only one issue at hand, you're either for it or against it, there is no middle ground. If you prefer something that is some sort of third alternative, that means you're against it because it's not what you want. Now, the one difficulty is often times it is hard to get your alternative mentioned so that is a different story. But really as far as a voting voice in the case of particulars in a policy or legislation, you're for something or against it, there really is no middle ground.
Brad, you been thinking a lot about who to marry lately? Haha
As far as the question you pose with candidates, I think there really is a need to practice pragmatic politics. I mean do we as human beings ever completely agree with anyone or anything? It's a rare situation if it ever happens. So really that means we need to choose what we think is the best option out of what we have. I mean it's completely irresponsible and irrational to run from a choice just because we don't like our options. Life isn't easy and certainly we're placed in plenty of difficult circumstances as far as our decisions, but we have to find those decisions that are going to help perpetuate the greater good the best they can.
Post a Comment