Is Voting A Right Or A Civic Duty?

While a couple of the points presented in the picture below are debatable, most are solid. We must understand that it's not as if the voters really wobble between being conservative and liberal so often. Rather, in the last elections many Democrats failed to turn out and vote. Some of that failure to vote was the result of Republicans trying to create obstacles to voters who would be more affected, like Democrats. Some of the failure was also many Democrats who felt that it was pointless. Often the media, much of which is actually quite conservative (I mean the news outlets) promote a narrative that we should expect Republicans to win. Many Democrat voters bought into that, combined with the fallacious idea that the midterm elections are somehow less important.

Image is from: Janis Ian's Facebook page.

There is also the fallacious narrative that supposedly all politicians are bad, Republican and Democrat, alike. The fact is there are many bad politicians. There many Democrats who are less than ideal. But, when you vote for the "lesser of two evils" you are setting the stage for greater chances of success when you then appeal to those politicians to get important things done. Additionally, you should know that a smaller percent of Democrat politicians than Republican politicians are bad. On top of that, most of those Democrats that are bad tend to be less bad than the Republicans who are bad. So, ultimately, even if you feel that Democrats are as bad as Republicans, you should know they really aren't "as bad".

With that, you should also know that elections depend on numbers. Statistically Democrats significantly outnumber Republicans across the nation. If every Democrat voter voted and every Republican voter voted, the outcome would be decidedly in favor of Democrats, overall. And, while in certain districts it's true that the balance can be quite in favor of Republicans, if there are more Democrats in office than Republicans it will be harder for Republicans to Gerrymander the districts in their favor. In future elections those districts would shift to favor Democrats.

Image from: Vocal Progressives's Facebook page.

Voting is not so much a privilege or a "right", as we Americans have long been taught. Rather, voting is a civic duty. As a citizen it is your duty to vote in the elections. As a Democratic-Republican Federation, our nation necessarily depends on the votes of the people. Your country, your state, and your city, all depend on your participation. It is a civic duty to vote because the vote of the people determines the direction of the society, the nation and state. Your failure to vote can negatively affect your neighbor, and yourself, every bit as much as the vote of each conservative. Your failure to vote is telling your neighbor that you will leave her at the mercy of corporations that would rather take the welfare they'd deny her. Your failure to vote is you telling your children that they should not care about their education, because you'll allow conservatives to cut funding to schools. Voting is a civic duty.

Copyright © 2015, Joshua Michail.

Why Are Atheists Not Represented In American Politics?

 With a portion of Americans identifying as having no religion being around 20%, and perhaps even 10% being actually atheist, why are atheists not represented in Congress? The problem is that atheists are unduly regarded with so much distrust. Religious bigotry is still persistent in America. Even moderates are hesitant to vote for an openly atheist candidate. We have a lot of work still ahead of us to have actual social justice, and true equality for all.

An Atheist For Congress?

Read Carlos S. Moreno's Op-Ed piece, on CNN, regarding the openly atheist candidate who plans to run for congress. The link is above.

Censorship Inherently Admits Weakness

The False Dichotomy Of Pragmatism Versus Idealism.

Considering the natural struggle between pragmatism and idealism it seems it should be expected that people would define themselves as either one or the other. Of course, there are plenty of other people who have no interest in the issue. Many people don't identify as being either. But some people will say that they are idealists, while some will say that they are pragmatists. People seem to act as if they are picking camps, as if they must choose a side in a battle. I, however, submit that there is another way. I would say that I am a “pragmatic-idealist”.

Before this discussion continues, what pragmatism and what idealism mean should be addressed. On the surface of it, the differences between pragmatism and idealism would suggest that they might well be mutually exclusive concepts. I should first clarify that I'm not talking about the respective philosophies. Idealism, in the sense that I and most people mean, is not the philosophy of “Idealism” but rather a view, or an attitude, that the current state of affairs is faulty and that we should pursue a better condition. Also pragmatism, in the sense used here and commonly, is likewise not the philosophy of “Pragmatism” but rather the view, or attitude, that in order to accomplish something we must be willing to consider the alternative options or do what is necessary. Though, 'pragmatism' in the sense I use it here and the philosophy of Pragmatism are much closer than the way I'm using 'idealism' here and the philosophy of Idealism.

Many people who are idealistic look at those who would take a more pragmatic approach as if they were traitors to the cause. This, however, is a disservice to the cause itself. Those ardent idealists are ignoring a fundamental fact; that is that some progress is better than no progress. Also, if the idealists disavow the more pragmatic members of the cause they will diminish the power of their movement. Sometimes we cannot have the full progress we'd prefer. But if we sell out the goal for the sake of inflexible ideology we should not be surprised when we completely fail altogether. Having 'vision' alone cannot accomplish great deeds.

Yet pragmatism, in and of itself, cannot give guidance. We can be prepared to take whatever action may be necessary to accomplish some act, but without some idea of what we want to achieve what would be the point? Pragmatism is the art of getting done what can be done. Central to this is the concept of compromise. There is a necessary give-and-take involved in just about any problem solving effort. The pragmatic person understands the need to analyze the problem, learns about the issues involved, and has an understanding of how the various possible courses of action will affect them.

In a sense, the problem is that we are here and the solution is to get over there. In this way, idealism is the compass which points us in the direction, while pragmatism is the ship which makes the journey possible. So the fact is that we do not face a choice between idealism or pragmatism. The choice is between being only idealistic or being pragmatically idealistic. There is no dichotomy between the idealism which says this is how it is and that is what it ought to be, and the pragmatism that says this is the problem and this is what can be done about it.

Copyright © 2011 Joshua Michail