I recall as a child the notion of political alignment being shrouded in the confines of personal information. Like a person’s weight or their income, it was rude to blatantly inquire of which party someone belonged. Just 15 years ago, the common man or woman, using my parents as examples, kept their ideologies veiled. Voting was a private matter; for whom you cast or in what you believed, it was of nobody’s business but your own.
Such an era appears to have faded in the recent decade. Alongside the rise of the millennial generation into America’s political society, a transference has occurred. We tend to wear our party alignment as a badge of honor; it’s used in part for our personal identification and used wholly by others to sum our beliefs on an array of social, economic and political topics.
How often do we presume a Republican is a fierce defender of the Second Amendment, a pro-life supporter and in favor of less government regulation? How often is a Democrat a believed proponent of social programs, increased taxes on the upper class and decreased military spending? Now, it’s not incorrect to cast certain beliefs under a collective umbrella term such as Republican, Democrat, conservative or liberal.
The two parties do historically follow a general system of ideology, with some substantial albeit gradual shifts in the past such as the Republican/Democrat switch in the decades following the Civil War. However, we have reached a point of extremism in modern day in regard to the conclusions we draw onto others.
The assumption that Democrats advocate for social welfare, or that Republicans support gun rights, are largely harmless. They may be characterized as broad, but nobody would condemn them as false or misrepresentative. People may form disagreements and even conclude on each other’s personalities based on these beliefs, but again the effects are minimal.
However, in recent years, these assumptions have been incredibly generalized and coupled with poor conclusions of often degrading qualities. Liberals are socialists. Conservatives are fascists, racists, sexists. They are ignorant. Insults have replaced discourse.
We find ourselves in a political tug of war, with either side more invested in conquering the other than hearing what they have to say. We have shut ourselves out from the conversation. We have receded further from one another along the spectrum; the satisfaction of selective hearing has overcome our desire to think openly. In doing so, we have curtailed ourselves of understanding and the ability to sympathize. We marginalize one another and remain detached from the social experiences that others endure.
If it doesn’t happen to us, it doesn’t happen at all. If it doesn’t align with my belief, it isn’t right. If you think this, you are that. Period.
American politics has become a sport. It’s not a cohesive mass of people with differing beliefs working together to function; it’s a game, where societal groups compete for dominance and relevance. Cable news channels polarize us into factions by hosting hours of talk shows that seek to propagate the message of their respective parties. Separation breeds controversy and controversy attracts viewers, readers and new members. Division rules the American people, seeping into our veins like a poison, infecting us with ignorance and intolerance.
While still we struggle not to judge one another by the color of our skin, we have instilled a new prejudice based on political alignment. This is not how things once were; it is not how they’ve always been. We have progressed politically and socially through decades past, setting aside differences in the interests of our nation and its people. We have unified ourselves for the greater good, for the safety and security of democracy.
But now, we are losing our way. Now, it is a very real fear that only a truly catastrophic or tragic event may disrupt the civil feud ongoing amid American politics. That only something as extreme as another terrorist attack on American soil will unite us under the fire of patriotism; one of the few traits that transcend politics. We should all hope that such an event does not prove itself necessary to bring us together, and we should collectively strive to avoid a setting where it is.
Fortunate are the generation my peers and I find ourselves a part of. The advancements in technology in the new millennium, practically paralleling our own development, have seen us grow up in a world brimming with potential. Information is abundant and just a click away for most. The use of smartphones grants us access in seconds. We are connected now more than ever. Major global events, natural disasters, etc. all can be reported and spread to millions in minutes.
In the political environment, this has led to a saturation of the misleading and uninformed. False news stories are shared like candy across social media sites. An attention-grabbing headline and shocking photo are all it takes to rack up views, comments, likes and shares. Despite efforts to discredit these articles and diminish their influence, they root themselves in our brains and combat facts. They breed false information. They tell us that vaccines cause autism or that Hillary Clinton sold weapons to ISIS as secretary of state. In politics, this infection of falsity furthers our divide.
Our greatest feature has become the irony of our state of politics. Despite all our access to factual information, we find ourselves submerged in falsehood. We accept what we read at face value, rather than spend an additional minute to double check. Abundance and lethargy are leaving us ignorant. Our pride sees us doubting the testimony of experts, paranoid that they are politically driven. We are becoming the generation where truth is irrelevant, but we can change the tide if we wish.
Stop blindly sharing articles on social media. Check the facts against legitimate sites. Don’t alienate those who believe misinformation; hear what they say and then present your perspective, guiding them toward the facts. Let go of political affiliations in unrelated topics. We are not the sum of the party we belong to. Our country will never function under the dictation of a single group.
Why should we continue to strive for political domination? Better to enrich our understanding through discussion and seek mediation than to further the division to a point of totality, wherein we forego conversation in favor of silence because it’s become easier not to talk than it has not to listen. We can establish political give-and-take to outcome progress or let greed drive us to a stalemate. The right, the left, both are well-worn roads, but the middle is less traveled — perhaps it will make all the difference.
* Story by Caleb Lundquist
________________________________________________________________________________________
I think we can all agree that it’s been a tumultuous year in terms of politics. Just 365 days ago, our eyes were glued to our devices as presidential hopefuls Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump battled for the Oval Office. Now, our eyes can’t leave our screens as we watch the current state of affairs play out on our Twitter feeds.
It’s like a car accident; you don’t want to look, but you can’t help it. You have to watch the chaos unfold.
This time is one of the most divisive in our nation’s history, with people vehemently for or against our president. But I prefer not to care.
Now, that doesn’t mean I don’t care about what’s happening politically, but I just choose not to get involved in the battle. I’m that weird middle person who doesn’t really want to debate whether or not Clinton would’ve been a bad president or if Trump’s changes are spelling doom for the whole world. I just don’t care.
In a way, I, as have many others, have been forced to be in a more neutral position. Whether it be because of our position or because of who we’re friends with, neutrality is necessary for some of us.
Let me explain.
I live with and am friends with Trump supporters. Do I necessarily agree with supporting someone who is unfit to be president? No, I don’t. But that doesn’t mean I move out of my apartment or stop hanging out with people who support our president. They’re still my friends.
That’s what really gets me about this whole thing. Not the circus of an election and presidency, but the way people just drop their friends or family or coworkers just because they support a different person.
This time has been divisive, yes, but we’ve overcome this before in our short history, so why should now be any different? If we’re able to look past simply political affiliations or who someone voted for in the last election, we might actually be able to have conversations and come to a more balanced perspective and country.
That’s what I care about. People caring about other people regardless of the way they think. There will always be people in life that you disagree with, but do you completely drop them and stick to your views? You shouldn’t. While it’s not always easy for me to be friends with people who I have somewhat large disagreements with, we’re able to have conversations about differences, accept them and move on — this is something that much of the country needs to learn how to do.
When it comes down to it, Trump is our president. We’re all Americans, and we need to be focused on bettering our own communities and the larger society instead of fighting each other at every turn.
And if you don’t like the state of the union, you have an election in three years to change it.
Story by Halle Olson
________________________________________________________________________________________
Today America finds itself lost, adrift in the midst of an identity crisis and rocked by continued culture wars. What do we and what will we stand for — apart from the national anthem, maybe. Are we still a beacon of liberty who accepts huddled masses with open arms? Does our priority lie with business or with protecting the environment? How do we cope with the uncomfortable parts of our history? The list goes on and on.
One of the biggest casualties of today’s political climate has been the middle-ground, which is all but lost. After years of demonizing the other side, it seems all we’re left with are the two ends of the spectrums. Everyone is drawn with the same brush. Movements like Black Lives Matter have made this all too obvious, by showing that advocating for reform to stop systematic brutality against minorities is to condone violence against police officers.
And this has been proven in polls and surveys as well, most recently courtesy of the NBC and the Wall Street Journal. Those findings, which revealed 80 percent of respondents saw the country as mostly or totally divided, showcase just how little agreement there is today. Obviously, Republicans and Democrats are divided: more than 75 percent of Democrats but less than a third of Republicans felt comfortable with societal changes that have made the country more diverse. That sort of party division reflects significant party polarization, which shouldn’t surprise anyone.
But the poll also showed how people — party affiliation aside — are on such different pages. It’s remarkable how economic status and geography dictate the way people perceive the economy.
But this isn’t the first time America has experienced an identity crisis, nor will it be the last. In fact, division almost seems synonymous with the year 1968, probably the most tumultuous year of the twentieth century.
The Tet Offensive strengthened a growing anti-war sentiment as people at home realized the government had lied to them about the situation in Vietnam. Martin Luther King Jr., the voice of the nonviolent civil rights movement, was assassinated, which touched off a wave of riots that left several cities including Chicago in flames. Robert Kennedy, running for the Democratic presidential nomination after sitting president Lyndon Johnson declined to pursue a second term, was assassinated leaving the Democratic Party without its forerunner. The party’s convention was marked by violence between protesters and police, highlighting a deeply divided party. To many, it seemed the fabric that held America together was being undone.
But somehow, against all odds, America survived 1968, as it will survive 2017.
One way to understand American politics is like a pendulum, swinging back and forth. After electing two very liberal presidents in John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson, the pendulum swung hard the other way, with the elections of strong conservatives Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan, both of whom won an election with more than 500 electoral votes.
Eight years ago the country elected its first black president. Last year, it elected a man who’s had difficulty condemning white supremacists. If that’s not a swing back, I don’t know what is.
For his part, there’s no denying the president has added to a deeply divided country. His recent attacks against athletes kneeling during the national anthem certainly highlight this. More so, Trump’s election gave a voice to groups of people — such as White Nationalists — who further the division in this country, as seen by the clash in Charleston that left one dead.
There’s something to be said about a president who has no qualms about inflaming racial tensions just to keep attention off his incredibly dysfunctional administration, in this case, its meager response to assist Puerto Rico. But that’s a topic for another day.
So in the meantime, how do we get America back on the same page?
A good place to start might be stepping out of our comfort zones. A Pew Research study revealed only one in 10 people have a lot of friends from the opposite political party. It’s natural to be drawn toward like-minded people, but by associating more with people who don’t necessarily share your beliefs, it could help in understanding the other side. They’re people too, no matter how wrong they may be.
Today’s rampant technology has made it all too easy to live in a bubble, where all the stories and posts on our feeds reinforce our worldview. A professor of mine once told my class that those of us who gravitate toward things like the Daily Show should turn on Fox News every once in a while (and vice versa). “You don’t have to agree with what they say,” he told us. “But it is important to hear more viewpoints.”
Story by Adam Poklop
