Youth Politics

I don’t oppose the fact that ideas can be evil. If someone came up with an idea to kill lots of innocent people for absolutely no purpose, I would consider that idea to be evil. I’m just stating my definition of what evil can possibly mean. How then is socialism evil?

Socialism is the economic idea that the government would maintain the central source of power and should nationalize sectors of the economy to promote an even and fair distribution of wealth. This idea in and of itself does not sound like an evil idea. Yet, many people detest socialism and even use it as an insult. Sure some people are extremely proud of the capitalistic view, but that does not mean that socialism is necessarily evil. There’s a difference between disagreeing with an idea and thinking that an idea is evil or just plain wrong.

The problem is that so many associate socialism with communism, and in the United States at least, communism is looked down upon due to our dealings with the Russians, Cuba, and even China during the Cold War. Communist countries have, in general, had poor human rights records for instance. Other critics say that political and economic freedoms are suppressed and thus freedoms are taken away. As you may know the United States was founded on freedom, and a socialist model simply wouldn’t do. This is why the mere thought of socialism is looked down upon.

This doesn’t have to be true in other countries however. If a country and its populace agree to such an economic and political policy then so be it. Socialism itself isn’t what is evil, it is what people do with that idea that can be so harmful. For example, totalitarian governments use it as a way to gain power and have control over their people.

There are of course plenty of disagreements on which policy is better, As far as my stance, I know that I don’t consider socialism an evil in the world. I keep that in mind when I express my opinion. I do think it’s quite unrealistic, in the sense that power corrupts too easily, but that’s just how I see it.

Can a socialist society work? And what would have to be done for such a society to function? Can it be done with relatively little impact on personal freedoms? What do you think?

Comments are more than welcome!

Here’s a question I’ve been pondering lately:

Should the government protect us from ourselves?

I actually asked this very question on Twitter, and the responses were quite mixed. I sort of expected a clear-cut winner, but that was not the case.

If the government were to protect us from ourselves, it would mean that society could not undermine it’s own country, even if it wanted to. But what does this imply? This would imply that the government no longer represents its people’s wishes. That seems bad to me.

On the flip side, if the government did not go against the common word, the people would end up destroying the nation (again, assuming that was society’s intent). We already know that majority rule is not always ideal, and so it would be wrong to allow the majority to destroy a nation against the will of the minority. Maybe you disagree with me here, but that’s how I see it.

This is a fundamental question I think, because your viewpoint here determines what you want and do not want the government to be able to do. Those who strongly believe in the will of the people would argue that the government has no choice but to listen to the people’s demands, even if that demand is the destruction of the government/nation. Those who believe that people sometimes do not know what is best would argue that the government has the right to tell them what is right and what is wrong. I… am torn.

To me it seems to be a case-by-case basis matter. Sometimes I do want popular vote to matter, and other times I want the government to know what is best, especially since the people can never know all the facts or even pretend to. But where do we draw the line? How do we figure out what the government should determine and what the people should determine? At what point should the government stop even indirectly representing the majority? Should the government ever stop representing the majority of its people at all?

Comments would be greatly appreciated.

Oh, if you’d like to have my blog’s posts delivered to you via email, that is now available at the top of the sidebar.

For those who are generally bad at getting your point across or persuading anyone to support your political cause, it’s probably because you haven’t been following these five key crucial ways to win a political debate 100% of the time.

1. Remember that your viewpoint is absolutely correct and that no one can ever persuade you otherwise. There is also no such thing as a “similar” viewpoint; it’s either yours or wrong. Remember to convey that fact to your opponents.

2. Facts don’t lie, and neither do false facts. Back up everything you say with a fact, whether or not that fact actually exists.

3. Tell your opponent that his/her view makes absolutely no sense, and that his/her opinion doesn’t matter. Arrogance is key with this one.

4. Name calling. This one is a classic and if you’re not already doing it, you’re a shameful debater.

5. Insult the opponent’s immediate family and friends. Once your opponent has lost his or her temper, they are sure to throw away the debate by spewing nonsense.

So there you have it, five sure fire ways to win any political argument. If you didn’t find this post to be sarcastic, then you should be worried : >

I hope you enjoyed this post. If you haven’t done so and would like my posts delivered to you, sign up to my RSS feed.

I am now also mini-updating on Twitter! So if you want brief snippets of what I think throughout the day as well as updates on the stocks I’m following, follow me on Twitter.

I’d like to discuss marriage.

Now, I’ve never been married, nor have I ever considered it. I’m only 20, so this seems like a reasonable thing for me to say. When I think of marriage however, I think commitment. Marriage is a commitment to the one person that you love most, and signifies a promise of everlasting love and companionship with said person. That, to me, is what marriage is supposed to be. But is that what marriage is in the United States?

I get tired of people telling other people that they aren’t allowed to get married. Who gives you the right to decide who can and cannot get married? What I mean is this: there are plenty of people out there in the world who don’t want homosexuals to get married. My question is, why? Is it because it doesn’t fit into your definition of marriage?

Does getting married and then getting unmarried a few years later fit into your definition of marriage? Roughly 50 percent of Americans couples get divorced. That’s really high for a promise that’s supposed to last “til death do us part”. Straight folks don’t even want to stay married. There are lots of people who cringe at the mere fact of getting married. Who are divorced people to say who can and cannot get married, when they themselves can’t uphold to the values of marriage?

These are questions I ask myself and to others, because I think it’s extremely important to know why you’re fighting for a certain cause and why you believe you are absolutely 100 percent in the right. I understand the view point of those opposed to gay marriage. The arguments range anywhere from the definition of marriage to the whole slippery slope argument (people marrying their siblings, animals, inanimate objects?) I don’t think any of the arguments against gay marriage are any good nor are they valid, but that’s only my view on the matter.

My one true question for everyone is: How sacred is marriage, and is it important to you?

Oh, and a merry Christmas eve for those celebrating!

So apparently DC hotel rooms are all being booked up for the historic inauguration of president elect Barack Obama. It’s pretty exciting actually, and I can see why people would do that. However, for me, it’s not all fantastic. Let me explain why.

First I’d like to say that this influx of visitors to DC is going to be awesome for local businesses who typically don’t have much of anything going on after the New Year’s festivities. I bet restaurants can’t wait.

Second, wow is traffic in DC going to be awful. Although I may  have liked to go to the inauguration, I will be back in college so attendance by me is unlikely. I wonder if people will start renting out rooms in their houses once all the hotel rooms have booked up…

Third, while I understand everyone’s enthusiasm, it’s something we definitely need to put behind us. The fact that people care this much that someone with some African decent has made it into the White House is both telling of the progress America has made and that we need to be able to move beyond hugely congratulating those of other origins. Electing a black president or a Hispanic president or an Asian president should be no different than electing a white president, and that’s what I would love to see in the years ahead.

Perhaps I’m being a little too insensitive, but the truth is I always had seen this as a possibility. I mean, the hit show 24 had a black president in office and look at the viewership for that! I’m not the least bit surprised that Obama won the presidency, and now that he has, people need to both celebrate and then realize that this will happen again. Accepting it as the norm is the next logical step.

Will America celebrate if a Hispanic president made it into office? You tell me.