In the battle between human rights and capitalism, I'm on the side of human rights.
Plain and simple, the purpose of government is to maintain a peaceful society. A libertarian might say that the government shouldn’t poke its head into anything unless it’s necessary. The problem is that everybody thinks that exact thing. The issue is we don't agree on what is necessary. To be completely honest, we all need the government. However cozy you think your life is, the government is what’s keeping it afloat.
Our nation has a very strong rule of law. That means that the laws in our country are obeyed and enforced. If somebody burgles my house, the police will try to nab the perpetrator and the courts will bring them justice. The legislators will write laws that can then be broken. Our nation also has a strong sense of freedom. If I want to do something, anything—I can do it. The balance of these two ideals can be summed up thusly: I can start a business (capitalism), and the government will make sure that I’m playing fair (human rights). The government needs to maintain the safety of the populace (human rights) while allowing as much free reign as possible for businesses (capitalism). Some meddling is necessary in order to keep us free from threats such as monopolies, counterfeiting, unsafe products, swindlers, and unsafe working environments.
When it comes to politics, the media (and politicians) stick to hot-button issues on the whole. These are questions in the running of our country that stir up emotions: birth control, taxes, wealth, unemployment, healthcare, terrorism, etc. These issues have to do with opinions as well as facts. The facts, by the by, are often blurred by statistics, which the average person is unlikely to interpret correctly. This means that each side can blur what actually happened to promote their cause. Take for example the following statements: “Nearly 3,000 people died in the terrorist attacks on 9/11. It truly is a sad day for our country.” On the other, hand: “Only 3,000 people died in the terrorist attacks on 9/11. Considering the population and the severity of the damage, it is a miracle that figure is so low.” Both of these statements use the same numbers, but you can see how we can be bamboozled by the way the numbers are presented. Politicians lean on the emotions of their followers rather than on the cold hard facts. In the same year as 9/11 there were 37,795 deaths related to police reported traffic accidents according to the NHTSA: more than ten times the deaths in the terrorist attacks. How many politicians used traffic safety as a platform in the coming elections?
The point is, we really paid for our emotions with 9/11. The war in Afghanistan and the war in Iraq were started based on national sentiment rather on actual need (and possibly on racism), even though Al-Qaeda is based and funded in Saudi Arabia. The thought of the United States going to war with Saudi Arabia is laughable, considering our dependence on Saudi oil, because of course, besides emotions, politcs is money. Politicians talk about money because they have money, and because we have money and we want more. We want our money protected. We don’t want to spend money (capitalism), but we still want stuff (human rights). This is never going to happen because it just doesn’t make sense. There’s no such thing as a free lunch. Somebody is paying for food stamps (hint: it’s all of us).
Capitalism is always going to be at odds with human rights. Human rights cost money and very rarely give a return investment. Capitalism often skates over human rights for this very reason. The problem is that those with enough wealth to even think about running for president of this country are capitalists. These are men and women who got to where they are by preserving their own capitalist interests. I can only try to side with those with enough mercy and grace to also promote human rights. It’s a narrow balance. How do you preserve freedom for businesses as well as for individuals?
It may not even matter in today’s political atmosphere. A politician is going to say whatever it takes to get votes. The problem is that the nation on a whole has a very simple mindset. Individually we may have great ideas, but what is going to get votes is simple, psychologically important issues that affect all of us—instead of societally important issues.
It also may not matter because the president doesn't run this country—we do! If you think the 99% don’t have any control in this country, think again. I may not be in a big room full of legislators, but I know that I can write to Carol Shea-Porter (my house representative) and tell her what I think. But still, I’m not thinking big enough. The country does not reside in a single room, or in a single government entity. The government may be the binding force to the country, but it is not the steak and potatoes between two oceans. I am a part of this country and I’m going to do my part. Like Kennedy said: “It is not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country!” Not for your government, but for your country. What does it matter who is leading us? We are ademocracy—ruled by the people! We rule ourselves. We have enough free reign to do what is necessary in order to bring about our desired ends.
It is up to ALL OF US to bring the economy back to where it needs to be. It’s going to take ALL OF US to promote education. ALL OF US need to be honest when it comes to welfare. We don’t need a government to tell us what to do—we just need the government to maintain what we have worked so hard to produce. So vote! Not just for the president, but for our actual lawmakers—the congressmen. Don't listen to a millionaire tell you what he'll try (And mostly likely fail at) doing. Tell them what we want! And they're more likely to make it happen.
No comments:
Post a Comment