Opinion | Miami students should look beyond political party affiliation
Published: Monday, August 20, 2012
Updated: Monday, August 20, 2012 22:08
It’s officially political crunch time with the presidential elections less than three months away.
If the constant stream of political television ads didn’t give it away, the telemarketing calls did.
These ads really annoy me.
I don’t even know which side I am going to vote for and I don’t think the two candidates bashing each other for often out-of-context statements and irrelevant gaffes will help me decide.
Maybe I won’t even vote.
I know that my indecisiveness is one of the reasons why candidates like Romney and Obama pump out so many expensive advertisements each election year, but I don’t know who the right choice is.
It’s not that I don’t have ideas for the future of America. It’s just that I find it difficult to align my beliefs with the beliefs of just two choices.
People say the elections are rigged since candidates can buy votes with expensive campaigns.
If only they could literally buy my vote, I’d certainly let the bidding commence.
Frankly, I don’t think my vote would determine the outcome anyways.
Although I don’t have a personal interest in the electoral madness, I find it entertaining to hear about the political beliefs of my peers.
Since I spent the entire summer in Oxford, I occupied a lot of long, boring days talking about politics with friends.
Otherwise we would have probably run out of things to converse about.
Other students who spent the summer in Oxford know what I’m talking about.
The general consensus I was able to gather was that students at Miami declare themselves, “fiscally conservative and socially liberal.”
I don’t like to generalize but I’m sure you’d agree that many Miami students would simplify their political beliefs this way.
It’s the way I’ve always described my beliefs, until now at least. It seems like the ultimate political stance. And in my opinion, it is.
However, it’s completely unrealistic in terms of real world application.
In order for a government/society/group to be socially liberal, it needs funding from taxes.
A welfare system is considered to be socially liberal but financing it would contradict the pillars of monetary conservation. You could say the same for almost every other “social” objective on the liberal agenda: unemployment, healthcare, veteran care, research, agricultural subsidies, foreign aid and government housing.
Some would argue that these are not social matters and if that’s the case, which it isn’t, you essentially are left with just two “socially” liberal stances: pro-choice and pro-gay rights.
I refer to this political view as “Non-Christian Conservatism” or in some cases “Reformed-Christian Conservatism” depending on your remaining faith in God after rejecting his declarations concerning marriage and abortion.
I think it’s great if you’re a conservative and support gay marriage or a woman’s choice on abortion, but don’t declare yourself “socially liberal” because you simply are not.
I personally think homosexuals should be able to get married but to be honest, it’s probably not as important to our society’s wellbeing as providing homes for the homeless and food for the hungry.
The issue here is it’s difficult to slap a label on your political views, especially when there is a lot to frown about with each party.
When we label our beliefs we tend to vote on an issue with party bias instead of with an open mind. So just don’t label yourself; no one is forcing you to.
Whatever you do, don’t call yourself “socially liberal and fiscally conservative.”
Try not to call yourself a Democrat or a Republican either.
For the sake of democracy, declare yourself an independent (as in one who formulates their beliefs independent of political parties).
It’s much easier that way and delivers a lot less judgment.