Politics, Community, and Individuality

Voting: When did it become a selfish, compassionless act, and why?

Originally, the nation of America was founded on a principle that everyone was entitled to “life, liberty, and a pursuit of happiness.” There would be “liberty and justice for all.” Where did these precepts go, and why are they gone? When did voting become a way to be an individual and insert an opinion, and not a way to improve the world around us?

The Baby Boomers headed the individuality movement, as I will call it. This movement was characterized by selfishness, irresponsible hedonism, and an ability to take even the most simple things for granted. Don’t get me wrong; a lot of important events happened when the Boomers dominated the polls. Liberation movements, equal rights campaigns, and during this time, the nation saw real changes in how it was structured and in how certain people were treated. It isn’t the Boomers fault they want everything and get it, at least, not entirely. The Baby Boomers were raised by a generation that was victim to severe poverty, hunger, and wartime. Of course this generation felt a need to raise their children with what they did not have…which would be just about everything. As Brokaw said in Esquire, "Think about it: Most men worked in manual labor. Most women did manual labor in the home as well. So many parents from that generation have said to me, 'We had so little, we wanted our children to have so much--and we spoiled them.'"

But what type of values did that inflict on the Baby Boomers, and how is it in turn affecting their children? And how are we seeing this in voting? Too few are the times when you hear someone say something like, “Abortion is a choice an informed mother has to make for herself.” More likely the phrase, “Abortion is wrong, and it is murder,” is toted around, a verbal flag of personal opinion shoved onto others, purely so another person can have their say, their way. Boomers grew up with a strong sense of self, normally, not a bad thing. But that sense of self came without a strong sense of community, without the empathy that makes for a stronger nation. The individuality movement succeeded in wiping consideration and restraint from a generation, who are making up for it by flouting family values they didn’t believe in themselves when they were young.

Now take a look at anyone born from about 1981 to 1999. In fact, I am one of those people. How many of my generation vote? And more importantly, how many vote intelligently and as well-informed members of society? Too few are the times when younger people will go look up information about what they want introduced or banned from society; word by mouth information, a.k.a. the gossip mill, do all the work for them.

Liberty is not liberty if the decisions regarding it are not made responsibly and with the intention for doing good for people as a whole. The focus on one’s own gain motivates voters, and again, this isn’t wrong. It IS wrong, however, if that gain could be at the expense of another person’s happiness. An excellent example of a type of political campaign mentioned by John Berlau in 1997 involved the use of taxes to motivate voter to elect an official. These voters thought they would be getting a good deal. I have nothing against this man’s 1998 campaign; I am just using it as an example:

He calls Republican governor-elect James S. Gilmore III's winning use of the car tax "brilliant" and "very effective." From the very start of his campaign, Gilmore promised to abolish the property tax for cars valued at $20,000 and under, and his campaign spread red-and-blue road signs all over the Old Dominion emblazoned with the message "No Car Tax! Vote Gilmore." He defeated the popular Democratic lieutenant governor, Don Beyer, with a landslide 56 percent of the vote, helped the GOP win the other two statewide offices of lieutenant governor and attorney general -- and helped gain control of the Senate for the first time in the commonwealth's history.

Chrissy & Assocaites sum up this type of campaign strategy well, “While many political party candidates may present a platform that is of benefit to a group of individuals, to a community or to the entire nation, it is the underlying notion of, "What is in it for me?", that many political candidates continue to argue and present.”

What kind of life do we have if, by being too individual, we crush others’ chances at life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? A prime example is illegal immigration. While these immigrants are coming to America for better opportunities and a better life, the well-being of Americans suffers as a result. Out voting and politics are becoming somewhat simlar. One group, pro-lifers, would rather force a woman to keep a child, thereby inducing the minimum eighteen year bondage period as a parent, rather than allow a woman her own decision. It’s becoming clear people are seeing things from an opinionated and hostile standpoint. It is not hostile because voters are going out to literaly attack others; it is hostile because there is no compassion to balance out the fierce individuality of the United States.

In short, Chrissy & Associates sums up politics in an easy line, “--political campaigns are designed to tell you what you want to hear, without regard to what may be in the best interest of the long term health of your community or nation.” So, in conclusion, it is important that voters are tempered with knowledge, responsibility, and compassion, as well as a strong sense of individuality, to properly make decisions that would be for the good of a community as a whole, not simply good for one political party or one group.




SOURCES:

http://www.esquire.com/ESQ0400-APR_WORSTGEN.
By Paul Begala

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_n44_v13/ai_20017468
By John Berlau

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/451327/selfish_individualistic_desires_may.html
By Chrissy & Associates