First off, I know it's been forever since I posted. I have been so busy with school (designing an entire aircraft in about 13 school weeks) and my job (well, let's not get into that...) that blogging just hasn't been very high up on the list lately.
Also, I try to stay out of politics, usually because I don't have all the facts, and it will start some kind of debate I just don't feel like participating in. However, I felt this was something that needed to be said, and is something that many people, maybe even most people, could agree with, no matter their political views.
Anyway, I've been really dissatisfied with "my" government lately. When the founding fathers wrote the Constitution, they intended to have a small government of the people, for the people, and by the people. I feel that the current institution anything but this.
These feelings of animosity started a few weeks ago when the House voted to cut funding to Planned Parenthood. Outraged, my girlfriend signed an online petition to our House representative. He sent back a letter that said that he will always fight for the rights of the unborn, and that he wanted to protect the employees who were being forced into performing abortions. First off, Planned Parenthood does much more than perform abortions. Second off, no one is holding a gun to these employees' heads forcing them to perform abortions. If they are unhappy with their job, this is supposedly a free country, and they can leave and seek other employment. Finally, what happened to our "representatives" actually REPRESENTING us? As far as I'm aware, a sizable sum of Indiana residents signed this online petition, but our "representative" is so steadfast in his ways that he will vote for what HE thinks is right, NOT what his people want? Isn't that his job? What happened to a government FOR the people?
There is so much unrest leading into the 2012 Presidential election. Donald Trump is thinking about running, which is fine to me, he has a pretty solid platform and celebrities have run for office and won before (Ronald Reagan, anyone?). However, he is making priority number one uncovering Barack Obama's birth certificate. The government is on the verge of shutting down (more on that later), there are revolutions in the Middle East killing millions fighting for what they believe in, Japan is trying to put itself back together, and his number one priority is finding out whether or not Barack Obama was born in the United States? That is just absurd.
Now the government is just going to shut down because they can't do their jobs and come to a compromise. Again, I'm not really sure with what is going on to cause this, but isn't their job to work out compromises? If I were to just walk out of the building one night on duty because I was frustrated and not come back for a week, there DEFINITELY would not be a job waiting for me when I got back, and the same could be said for almost every employee in this once great nation; what puts the politicians above us? What happened to a government BY the people and OF the people?
We are all brought up to be open to diversity, but there is so much hate in the government. It is unbelievable. Again, I am not fully aware of everything that goes on, but it seems from what I do catch that, in general, the Democrats seem to run a ship that is what the founding fathers would want, but the Republicans make all their decisions with their nose in the Bible. This was a book that was written 2000 years ago. It was great for the simple people that lived 2000 years ago, but it should not be the deciding factor in the modern age. Many Republicans are on record as being uncomfortable with anyone that is NOT a Christian, and would never work with anyone that was a Muslim, Jew, and/or member of the gay community. But in the same breath, they tell us to be open to all cultures. I just don't get it. There are people dying in the Middle East for freedom, and all the American government wants to do is restrict everyone's freedom. I'm tired of all the hypocrisy. I'm tired of all the hate. All the Republicans and Tea Partiers claim they are doing what the founding fathers would want, but I believe that if they were to show up to Washington today, they would be very displeased and ashamed with what they found.
I want my government of the people, for the people, and by the people back.
^This.
ReplyDeleteI don't know that the government is on the verge of shutting down... I assume that you're referring to the spontaneous vacation that our democratic representatives took here in Indiana? I'm pretty pissed about that, for sure...
I've believed for quite a while that the government is not interested in the good of the people, because it *can't possibly* act for the good of the people, thanks to the law of unintended consequences. The factors involved in any given choice of the government are so numerous and so conflicted (i.e. it effects some groups positively and some groups negatively) that any choice that a governmental official makes will be seen as simultaneously positive and negative. Now, a given choice may be considered "overall" good or bad, but this is a rare and weak thing.
Therefore, the purpose of the government is not to act in the interest of the *people*. Its purpose is to:
1) maintain the power of the government by establishing a "game" of voting that gives the illusion of choosing officials and thus influencing the whims of the government.
2) act in the interest of the government's continued existence. To some extent, this involves making the people happy, but only insofar as it keeps the people alive, working, and not rebelling. It also entails such things as "not getting blowed up."
Truly acting in the interest of the people is a myth, unless the peoples' "interest" can be summed up in "alive, working, and not rebelling." I continue to believe that displeasure with the POLITICAL (not personal) actions of an official is highly unlikely to have a political official removed from office, despite the will and actions of the people. Nixon wasn't removed, he resigned. Bill Clinton's impeachment did not result in his removal from office. Bush (despite his numerous bad decisions) was not even impeached. Small scale governments seem to be no different.
Overall, I think I have to side with the democrats. I am strongly socially liberal (big surprise, eh?), and like to believe that I am fiscally conservative. I don't know that the two can coexist... but still, ideally, that's where I am. Republicans are Socially conservative and Fiscally Liberal (look at their spending track...). Democrats are socially and fiscally liberal. I think that Libertarianism, in its ideal, is where I would land. Socially liberal and Fiscally conservative. But I'm not sure that the current advocates of libertarianism are actually all that socially liberal...
Finally, I must say that, overall, I'm okay with the cutting of PP. I don't LIKE it, but I'm okay with it. Obama is making a necessary, if unpopular, decision to cut public programs because it's NEEDED to pay back our debt. I applaud him for it, even if it means that he'll have a harder time being re-elected. Still, I'd like to see some other, more pressing things cut... A short list:
a) ethanol fuel subsidization
b) gasoline subsidization
c) the war on drugs (highly ineffective)
d) military spending
The fuel will never happen... it would piss off Iowa way too much, which is where the first Caucus is held. They're not acting in the peoples' interest... it's all made to keep the wheels of the great machine oiled.
Disclaimer: I am not a political scientist, and am only partially trained in sociology. My opinions are developed from only a limited observance of the world around me, tainted heavily by what the media chooses to report on.
The House is about to take a vacation and just leave to avoid voting, much like Wisconsin and Indiana did.
ReplyDeleteIndeed, any action has numerous consequences. The point I was trying to make is that the government was originally intended so that your representative is actually your voice, but no matter how many letters you send to your representative, they will never act on the behalf of the people they represent, but rather, their own. So, like you said, they do what is necessary to keep it going, even if it pisses everyone off.
I am with you, socially liberal but economically conservative (actually, I'm economically moderate). I did not know that's where the Libertarians stood.
If PP weren't the first thing cut, it'd be one thing. But like you said, there are other cuts that could be made first. 40% of our corn goes to making ethanol, a fuel that is barely cheaper than gasoline, and burns nowhere near as efficiently. Money being spent on ethanol and gasoline need to be spent on dissociating water into hydrogen and oxygen. I firmly believe hydrogen is the fuel of the future. The problem, however, is that we get most of our hydrogen from oil. If they were to legalize marijuana, a substance proven (by SCIENCE!) to be less harmful than alcohol, not only would they be cutting the funding to suppress it, but they could also tax it and make TONS of cash. And our military is all over the world...let our boys come home.
It was also the fact the state rep was so disrespectful and didn't even consider what it was that his people wanted that upset me about the whole situation, not even the cut itself.
I didn't realize that the house was considering that! Jesus freakin' christ... I hate them. I hate them all.
ReplyDeleteWe are only given the weapons of revolution to truly make our voices heard. And, when I say that, what I mean is that we're given the option to die if we so choose.
TL;DR RRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGGGGEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!