Well here I am having to open a commentary with the subject that I hate the most...politics. It's not that I don't have political opinions because I do. It's just that for what I am trying to do here it isn't a good idea. You see when I look at decisions such as political ones to me it's something that happens later in a process. What I mean is that before someone makes a decision about politics there were life experiences, environment, and outward influencers that led to the outcome of that decision. I would rather study those things instead. I just recently did a commentary on the separation of church and state as well as religious liberty. Low and behold something happens in government that affects religious liberty and now I feel as though I have to talk about it.
There are many reasons to avoid politics when you are trying to be fair and call something right down the middle. The biggest issue is the divisive nature. The moment you pick one side over the other you immediately open yourself to ad hominem attacks. The ad hominem is when someone attacks the speaker or writer in a personal way without attacking the substance of the argument the person is actually putting forth. It's common in political debates. It could be evidence that the attacker has no counter to your argument but that is not always the case. Either way I try to be fair but people are going to be people.
Though I know it isn't true, politicians seem more corrupt now than they have ever been. The truth of the matter is they were always this way going back to the beginning of the country but now it's pretty bad. I don't think all politicians are bad there may be a few good ones, but I don't think there's many at all. Now I don't think that everyone who decides to become a politician is evil. That is just silly. I think the job itself leads to it in the end. The biggest agent of corruption is power. The more power a government has the more corrupt it will become. This is why republicans prefer smaller government and tend to be against social programs because if the government has the power to give you something then it also has the power to take it away. A more honest way of saying it is that if a government has the power to give you something then they also have the power to either hold it for ransom, or use fearmongering to make you think someone else is going to take it away. Then next part is of course to stop that from happening you better do what they say. That doesn't mean all social programs are bad, some will always be needed. It just shows you how politicians use them.
A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.
-Gerald R. Ford
This is why things like socialism ultimately fail. It looks really good on paper and in theory but in application the leader at the center is either already corrupt or becomes corrupt. There are many other reasons as well but that is a big one. Politicians are like regular people in the way that their morality will shift depending on the amount of pressure placed on them one way or another. They change positions faster than porn stars. I feel like this is heightened with politicians. Much of this involves lobbyists, who are basically salesmen. It works just like it does in the civilian world. The salesman with the best presentation and offering the most perks is going to make the sale to the customer even if their product is horrible. This is an example of how a politician puts their own self interests ahead of those they are supposed to be representing. There are several ways that politicians rationalize or make excuses for their decisions. The bad part is that they all have some semblance of validity to them and so people accept them. However, it's a very slippery slope and they fall down that slope regularly. Some never make it back. This is by no means a full list but it will get you in the ballpark.
- I have to hold this job and do what I can to keep it because I can't help people otherwise
Many people who are not elected officials are still able to help those in need. There's charity's that could be started. There's advocacy groups to use a platform to improve things. There's philanthropic work where you can just give money to those in need. The idea that you must be an elected official to do good in the world is bogus. - I have to be an elected official to give a voice to the people the other side doesn't.
Therein lies the problem. It's true that the other side doesn't but why not? This one is the exact reason I wrote this is the first place. I'm going to discuss it more in a minute. For now just know that our elected officials are supposed to be looking out for the best interest of everyone but they don't even come close. - I can't go back to being a regular person because I am above them.
I doubt you will ever hear a politician say this bluntly and it isn't true of all politicians. It is true of many politicians. They don't respect the people they are supposed to represent. The best example of this is in the House of Representatives where you have representatives that refuse to live in the districts that they represent. Years ago there was some issue with a law. I think it as during the Bush administration. I don't remember the specifics and they aren't terribly important here. At one point one side of the House wanted to pass something saying that if a budget wasn't agreed on by a certain date that the representatives wouldn't get paid. The argument against this was that it was a stunt and it went against the dignity of the office. That's a lame argument and there is no dignity in being bad at your job and not caring. In real world if someone doesn't do their job they are fired immediately. Unfortunately, politicians can't be held accountable this way. This leads to those feelings of superiority.
That is just a small percentage of the mentalities that are present in these people. For now I want to returned to number 2 as promised. You may be asking yourself why am I writing about politics in a group of commentaries dealing with sex and religion? Hang with me a little bit longer and you'll find out exactly why. In number 2 I talked about the groups being divided. I only give this group a voice because you only give that group a voice. This is of course about our two party system that we have here. Sure there is some truth to it but it's also a scam. So let's look at this scenario. You have people in an exalted position. In most cases they somehow make much more money that their salary. In some cases 10 times more. They don't want to lose that and will keep it by any means. For this experiment you are that politician. So now let's take 2 voter groups and we'll just call them A and B for now. Let's say A doesn't like you and they've never liked you. They probably aren't going to like you either. Also, A and B have problems. B likes you but lately maybe they don't like you as much as they did in the past. Understand the setup? Okay let's dump the letters and diplomacy and get to reality now. Let's bring in the Equality Act and talk about it.
We'll pick up the next part in 2 days. Don't forget to upvote. For some reason one paragraph shows up in an embedded window and I don't know why. If someone could tell me that I'd appreciate it. Also I've tried to delete the psychology tag several times and it keeps coming back. So my apologies there. Have a great day!