A question I came across today:
As [with] the majority of Canadians I consider my views on political issues to be very liberal and I've only too often noticed that Americans seem to take a more conservative root when debating political issues such as drug laws, abortion and same sex marriage all of which I have no problems with. So my question is for any Americans; why is it that you guys are so conservative where did these values root from? is it a religious thing or is it just something that you believe in? or am I making to much of a generalization?
The reason I think this way is because I see your presidents views and notice that you had no problem re-electing him.
3 comments:
It's a good question. My best guess is that it probably had to do with how the country developed throughout it's history. For one thing I think there has always been a lot of fear in the American psyche. Americans are very afraid, and it's a something that goes right back to when the society was a colony struggling for survival, extending through the campaigns against the native americans, the slave system, the industrial revolution and our mania about communism, and our many military projects right up to the present. For instance, Americans were probably the only people in the world who genuinely feared Saddam Hussein, which explains a good deal about why US and world opinion diverged so sharply on the issue. According to polls in the region, not even Kuwaitis or Iranians viewed Iraq as a threat; in fact, it was viewed as one of the weakest regimes in the region (a complete secret to American audiences, who were led to believe he was the next Hitler, an accomplice to 9/11, etc.) So we're afraid of everyone: gays, blacks, mexicans, arabs, immigrants, the poor, and a scary world population whom we are convinced are jealous of us and want take what we have (the stock explanation for many, many things in world affairs we don't understand).
The other thing is that--I don't know how it is in Canada--we probably have the most effective propaganda system in the world, and this is really something you can't underemphasize in the way American public opinion is shaped. American conservatives will argue that it is dominated by "liberal elite," but what they don't appreciate is that even in institutions where this may be true, what is considered "liberal" in this country is much further to the right in orientation than "centrist" positions in the rest of the world. So this creates the illusion of debate between "two-sides," where the boundaries of debate are already so far to the right that, in my opinion, the "liberal" perspective doesn't resonate with people as being authentic. Or people are drawn to its overtures without examining its political effects, and get invested in defending someone like Clinton against someone like Bush, simply because he kept the liberal political party in power. Anyway, you really have to appreciate that most Americans get their news from only a handful of outlets which are all pretty much saying the same thing most of the time. Nobody's watching the BBC or the international news to get a different perspective, and are generally sensitive to any criticism of the country by outsiders; a reinforcing effect, I am sure. Only because the perspective is coming from private entities--corporations--and not government do people not recognize it as propaganda, because we identify any private control as analagous to democratic control (the term "democracy" has a special usage here, often conflated with economics), and don't recognize its corporate expression as antithetical to democracy in its marginalization of popular participation.
They have a parliament. We have a winner take all system.
Just last night I was watching a program on PBS about Shirley Chisolm. If you want to see how our system kills progressive ideals, then I think she's a great example (as was Howard Dean's presidential bid.)
It's not that the people are conservative. It's that the political system that is, and in fact any system that systematically forces people to choose between compromsing their ideals and disenfranchisement is going to be more conservative. That's the choice you have here.
In New Zealand I was able to be part of a party with only 5% of the vote and do that knowing that I would be represented. Here I had the choice between throwing my vote away or supporting someone who was less aligned with me than I would have preferred.
I don't think most Americans question that this is how our system is flawed. The dispute is in how you address it. I heard people at the Washington Peace rally indirectly saying that whereas some of us in the audience may have supported Kerry, clearly we had made the wrong decision and the consequence was Bush for another 4 years. In hindsight, I wish I had had the courage to boo that speaker while people were sitting there while such BS spewed from his lips unchallenged. Why do idiots so frequently get the podium at these rallies? I didn't make the wrong choice given the nature of system.
But once again, we must deal with the system as it is and then decide how to get from where we are at to where we want to be. It's either have another revolution, or get some people in the democratic party so we can reform the system. Or even get people elected into the Republican party to reform the system. God knows the Republicans run on both sides. Maybe we should start running as Republicans as well. But get in a position to change the laws, so that there are legal changes to provide people with electoral choices. Then maybe the canadians and the rest of the world will hear the liberal roar of America.
Post a Comment