Political answers found within middle ground

October 30, 2006 —

Perhaps more than anything else, the social and professional divide that political differences create between people discourages me to the point that I am disillusioned by politics in general.

It seems to me the reason there isn't more compromise or freedom of thought is because fundamentalists on both sides of the political spectrum are pulling everyone toward the extremes.

National Public Radio's Barbara Hagerty gave a lecture on campus as part of "The Challenge of Religion" series. She argued "a fundamentalist aligns themselves with a set of values but refuses to admit the other side has any value or merit." She argued fundamentalist extremes at both ends of the political spectrum define political discourse, preventing anyone in the middle to give voice to their opinion.

For example, if you think abortion is wrong, you must be a republican. Stand over here, and we'll tell you what other opinions you must adopt because you're a republican. Believe in gay marriage? You're a democrat. Stand here, you must also believe abortion should remain legal.

Why is everything black and white? Why do you have to believe and support one idea or the complete opposite? Look at Congress. You will occasionally see a democrat crossing party lines to vote with the republicans, and vice versa, but it's rare. If it does happen, it's a huge deal. How dare you betray your own political party! How dare you think different than the rest of the group! It's not that they think the complete opposite; it's more like they think closer to what the other group thinks, but has to side one way or the other.

I have tried my hand at following politics. This includes reading, watching the news, and coming to some sort of conclusion. The more I learn about politics today, the more I hate it.

In debate, there are never just two answers. You debate, argue, and come to conclusions. How can any reasonable conclusion consistently be so distant from compromise?

There is always room for more opinions, more debate, and different ideas and yet, it seems to me these aren't being taken into consideration, or aren't being listened to in the first place. The reason is when someone seeks out a compromise, they are either looked at as weak or just plain stupid.

There is no single prevailing ideology as to how best run a country. No one group, organization, political party, or person has it all figured out. If you think the democrats or republicans have it all figured out, you're dead wrong. Someone is always upset about something and that won't change.

That's why I don't understand why people put themselves at a disadvantage, and affiliate themselves with a certain party. You lose your personal identity, especially when there are only two sides to the story - black and white.

Look at Michigan's Proposal 2. The vote is to abolish affirmative action altogether, or keep it operating in its current form. Before being brought to the voters, why not figure out a plan of action that has been more thought out. It is possible. But no one wants to step on anybody's toes and be potentially embarrassed before their peers; giving an inch would make it seem that the other side has won.

Things are not always black and white. I wish people would start abandoning the opposite-view mentality and come closer to the middle ground. As a byproduct, you would possibly see the disinterested part of the population become more involved, or at least pay attention to politics. I don't know if that will ever happen. Personally, I have a short attention span.