Tag: sanders

As the 2016 presidential election continues to gain media momentum, I think it is incredibly important to recognize that one very important aspect of politics has been buried this election: the moderate American. The dynamics of this political movement have had a devastating effect on moderate America, who desires a country that is not based on extremist political views. So first and foremost, lets go ahead and summarize some of the important political truths that cultivate the two dominate political parties in America.

The Righty Right: Overall, a Republican can be simply defined as the desire for minimal large government involvement. This is not to be confused with conservatism. Conservatism is a political philosophy, essentially believing that the government should spend less to gain more. This is an important characteristic to understand before someone labels themselves or anyone else as a conservative. Minimal state and federal spending is the core value of the defined conservative. A Republican, on the other hand, believes that tax dollars should be used, but should be used wisely and to support the small enterprise to stimulate the economy. A Republican may or may not be a conservative; one is a political party, the other is a political philosophy. This is crucial to understanding the modern day political movement.

The Lefter Left: The same can be said for the Liberal vs. Democrat argument. Liberalism is the philosophy; Democrat is the party. So seemingly simple, yes? The Democratic party has changed substantially throughout history. Specifically, views on slavery, civil rights, and government programs. Wait, WHAT? The Dems have not always been civil rights crusaders with a desire to implement social programs? Right. Several crucial moments in history have cultivated the Democratic party into what it is today. (Explaining that, however, is a complete day’s work for a busy blogger) Essentially, the Democratic party can be defined by the changing social needs of the country. They historically support fiscal progressivism, which can be (but is not only) characterized by increased federal spending to support income inequality. A liberal (are you listening???) is not what most of American defines it as…a liberal is NOT a tree hugger, a gay rights activist, a “black lives matter” supporter, or a federal programs loving fanatic. Liberal philosophy is defined by one thing and one thing only: Liberals are open to political change in a changing environment. Liberalism can’t essentially and fundamentally be defined as the philosophy that wants to protect the minorities, support the impoverished, and increase government programs. Honestly, a liberal is someone that goes with the flow, rolls with the punches, and frames their political views around a changing culture.

So…are moderates just individuals with neoliberalism or neoconservative political ideals?

No. Not at all. The moderate is one that particularly believes in unification. Conservatives call them ill-informed and uneducated, Liberals call them unwilling to commit to a political cause. A moderate sees both sides of the partisan political system, they listen to opposing views, they consider multiple alternatives, and they recognize that an America that is dominated by one political party’s views is unrealistic (and essentially unhealthy). Most people love discussing politics with moderates; because they are non-condemning. They understand that America is changing, but that foundational characteristics are important. They can listen to different ideologies and philosophies without slamming fists on tables, throwing out expletives, or judging a person based on their political differences. The moderate American is the county’s barometer, a crucial part of political science.

The disappearance of the moderate from political America did not happen in an evening, a year, or even since the era of the Obama Administration. It has been a systematic elimination of the peacemakers that have banished the moderate from maintaining balance in a extremist nation.

So what happened? 

I’m going to take a deep breath and get ready for some heavy punches. In the 1980 election, Ronald Reagan parted the bipartisan sea by focusing on a evangelical population and their southern conservative values in his campaign. I would be lying to myself and to my readers if I didn’t give this a substantial high-five to the Reagan campaign. Brilliant. It was an incredibly intelligent move for him and his administration. However, I don’t think it would be unfair to credit the Reagan administration for sowing the seeds of the “Religious Right”. I think Sarah Palin has a life sized cutout of him in her house. Now, let me be clear. I have read books by every president since Reagan, and I have never agreed with every single decision that every president has made since 1980. I think it would be foolish to expect that someone who is running an entire country should see everything the way I do. I live in a small border town in Arizona, I don’t think I have the same perspective as someone who is making decisions for a nation.

It didn’t stop with Reagan, it snowballed. The RR party (Religious Right) gained a powerful ally with the election of southern boy President/Cowboy George Bush. This widened the gap between the political parties even more, due to his controversial win after defeating his opponent that received more popular votes than he. His stance on abortion, same-sex marriage, and religious freedom ignited a fire within the RR, and left the Democratic party bitter and angry.

Flash forward to 2008. The worst financial collapse in America’s history since the Great Depression. It’s important to recognize that there were multiple contributors to the 2008 recession, with one common economical thread. AIG, Wall Street, an sharp increase in what economists call “new money” (banks creating new money by issuing loans) and the mismatch of wages with the influx of housing costs. An overall view of the economic state of America will be addressed next week, but to keep things simple, we can just say that irresponsible mortgage lending, lack of financial corporation regulation (that dangerous big government we talk about), ill-founded Wall Street optimism, and a sharp increase in financial risk-taking are truly the most important bad guys in this blame game. With the Republican party screaming for tax cuts and the Democratic party arguing back about the significant increase in income and asset poverty, the country experienced it’s largest partisan division since the Civil War. (Some political scientists say ever)

So here we are. 2016. In the midst of a hyper partisan movement, where does a moderate American stand? Let’s look at the options.

Let’s start by taking a look at Hillary Clinton. She’s actually by far the most moderate choice. Many Democrats call her the “Republican lite”, which is would be essentially true if she wasn’t the most “liberal” (the real definition) candidate. Hillary definitely rolls with the punches, so to speak. Her voting record speaks for her stability; in favor of the Iraq war, now opposed. In favor of the Wall Street bailout, now opposed. Opposed same-sex marriage, now is endorsed by HRC, one of the nation’s most prestigious LGBT campaigns. So really, without voicing concern over the GOP’s e-mail crusade, it’s a little more concerning about the stability of her political stance.

Donald Trump. I want to begin by saying that I have read his book Crippled America 3 times in an attempt to wade through his narcissism. It’s a pretty tough read, not because he uses substantial vocabulary to entice his “educated” followers, but because you can only listen to how “great” he is so many times before you start to zone out and think about what you want for dinner instead of focusing on his public policy initiatives. His views on race, poverty, and social issues are terrifying. I never thought I’d see the day where a presidential candidate would spew such hatred about Americans (and immigrants,and refugees, and his fellow party members) and have an overall following of 46% of the GOP voting population. It would be misleading to say that this is the product of the RR, because this is a guy who can’t pronounce most of the books of the bible. This is definitely not your moderate candidate – moderates conventionally don’t support racism, sexism, homophobia, or any other kind of discrimination. Cross Trump off the list. He’s not your guy to bring a peace to divided partisanship. (We’ll save his tornado of economics policy for next week’s blog)

Ted Cruz. Somehow, this guy has gained incredible support from the RR. Which is not altogether shocking. Here’s why.

-Christianity has changed fundamentally since the first American settlers sailed the sees on pitched tents in the New World. Without boring you with an American Christian history lesson (which I can promise I can deliver on an impeccable scale) let’s for argument’s sake say that religious diversity started with Roger Williams in Rhode Island, who passionately supported religious tolerance. Essentially, Williams opened the door for LDS, fundamentalism, christian liberalism, and really any kind of Christianity you can think of. In the days of 2016, if you don’t agree with what your church is teaching, NO WORRIES! You can break off and start your VERY OWN CHRISTIAN CHURCH! Now, I make it sound slightly easier than it is, but not much. With the epidemic of elitism going on inside the church, you can surely expect to see that same attitude of elitism towards non-believers, different religions, different Christian denominations, and really, anyone who doesn’t believe exactly as one would deem correct. This has drastically increased the level of intolerance within the Christian population, which has created a radical movement of Christians that call for death penalties for homosexuals, scream about the supposed reversal of white power and privilege, and froth at the mouth when they think about waging a war on terrorism that we are not prepared to fight.

So it’s not strange to see an evangelical Christian that has immorally stolen votes by dishonesty being hoisted on the shoulders of fundamental Christians. The general 2016 Christian population doesn’t want religious liberty, they want religious elitism. So we can cross Ted Cruz off the list as a moderate’s candidate too…there’s no unity for partisanship in this guy’s psychology. It’s a fundamental Christian world or nothing.

Which brings me to the Bern. Good old Bernie. A self pronounced Democratic Socialist (which is fundamentally different than Socialism, to all my Christian Fundamentalists that like to argue that the millennial population doesn’t know what Socialism is) This is historically not your moderate candidate. Everyone in America knows that a Socialist government is not going to make our GOP population happy campers. But here’s why he has a listening ear from all of moderate America.

• He doesn’t have his hand in the money jar. He’s not influenced by big money, he doesn’t care about being a billionaire. That’s not on his bucket list. He wants to see everyone get a fair shot at success, and he doesn’t believe that oligarchy is a great way to do that.
• His religious beliefs are demonstrated by his offering of compassion. Something that his GOP opponents have lost along the way. If I didn’t know any better, I’d think Bernie was the Christian candidate. He’s the guy that loves to love on people.
• His economic strategy isn’t perfect. But it’s planned, documented, and consistent. So, he wants to eliminate tax havens. Why is that a problem? He wants to make sure the rich are paying their taxes too. I don’t know why this is an issue. I find it really difficult to reconcile this one within myself. I don’t even feel like this is an issue that is worth debating.
• He wants to expand federal programs. Well, I wish we didn’t have to expand federal programs. It would be really nice if communities took care of each other, and we could rely on family, friends, and communities to help out those that struggle. Unfortunately, philanthropy is a dying philosophy. Churches focus more on politics than they do on feeding the poor, taking care of the homeless, and volunteering to better their community. So while this is not a moderate view, essentially, the alternative isn’t very appealing either.
• Healthcare. I’m a retired Veteran, and honestly, I don’t have to worry about healthcare. However, I have family, friends, and fellow Americans that can’t get healthcare. So sure, I’ll pay 2% more taxes to help my fellow American.

Bernie is not a moderate’s ideal candidate either. A moderate would prefer social democracy to democratic socialism to start. But in an election plagued with hate, dishonesty, inconsistent economic plans, and discrimination, the moderate American is having to make extremist decisions. The disappearance of the moderate American is what is creating the dynamics of a blood thirsty presidential election.

 

Katherine Williams is a student of Social Work and Pubic Policy at Arizona State University. This website does not depict views of the ASU School of Social Work.