A major problem I see with today's society, is people do not acquire the information they need to be able to select a candidate to essentially "run" their country. Wouldn't it be much easier to vote if you knew un-biased opinions or facts about each candidate? Wouldn't be easier if you educated yourself on the beliefs they hold and how they relate to your everyday life? By no means do I think the presidential candidates have suffered with half of the problems most U.S. citizens have gone through; but when election day comes, it's much easier to assume nothing will change with a new president and sit at home only to say "my vote doesn't matter." Relating back to Kant's essay, he says: "If I have a book to serve as my understanding, a pastor to serve as my conscience, a physician to determine my diet for me, and so on, I need not exert myself at all. I need not think, if only I can pay: others will readily undertake the irksome work for me." People accept the role of being "ruled" and assume that no matter what they do, they will not have any effect on changing things in this country or changing the minds of say, Barack Obama or Mitt Romney. I agree with Kant when he says that these "guardians" restrain us from certain freedoms and making it difficult for people to think for themselves, but aren't they also a source to encourage citizens to go against this, and innovate new ideas?
Instead of standing up for what they believe, people do remain in an "immature" state by telling themselves that they're not going to vote because "their vote doesn't matter," or "nothing will change if I vote," or even "I am going to conform to what the government believes because it's easier to do that than to stand up for my own beliefs or innovate new ideas and propose them." How did people like W.E.B Du Bois, Karl Marx, or Max Weber create the field of sociology and convince people that there was more to social science than studying the individual? They stepped outside of the box and shared their new ideas with people, went through criticism (because no one at the time believed this aspect of studying behavior was legitimate), and created a new area of social science that is studied all over the world today because they were ENLIGHTENED.
Understanding and thinking for yourself is the key to emerging from immaturity. Believe what you want and say how you feel even if it goes against the majority or the government. This country was built on new innovation. Martin Luther King had a dream when he was a black man in a predominately white country. Now there are laws preventing discrimination. Abraham Lincoln attempted to end slavery in a country full of white land-owners who owned multiple slaves for many years. There are no more slaves. Charles Darwin came up with a "bizarre" theory that people emerged from animals, got kicked out of the school he taught at because it went against wide religious beliefs, and now many people believe his theory.
Every person can make a difference by not conforming to what society believes. Think of new ideas. VOTE. Gandhi once said, “The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing would suffice to solve most of the world’s problem.” Think for yourself, it makes the world of difference.
I really enjoyed this post and definitely agree with your argument that a major problem in today's society is that people do not acquire adequate information to select the "right" political candidate. Nowadays, smear campaigns and criticism of the opponent seem to be more of a priority than simply informing the citizens of each candidate's views. I think that this connects to what we have been talking about this week in class (that there are lots of stupid people in this world) because, perhaps, campaign advisers feel that feeding the public lies and "gossip" is more effective than just stating the facts. What do you guys think?
ReplyDeleteI agree as well with your observation that probably why many people don't wish to vote is because they lack the information to make a truthful decision. I also wanted to add that from the way I see it, I see only 4 possible outcomes; having the info and voting, not having proper info and voting, having the info but not choosing to vote, and finally not having info and not choosing to vote. Most of the country have the info and obviously use their power of expression from the 1st option. People who fall under the 2nd option are foolish, using their power combined with lack of info to possibly misrepresent the general consensus. With the 3rd option, people are labeled as just being lazy, because they have their opinions set straight in their mind, but don't wish to use their power of expression. And this article perfectly defines the 4th option, which I agree is a larger issue because it underdefines what the country holistically thinks. People really should be more educated on what is going on, so our nation can better act upon what we have.
ReplyDeleteThe vote of an individual has no influence on the election; it’s the votes of mobs of people that matter. If you have some new idea that will change the way society works in some way, voting is not going to change things. In any given American election, with very few exceptions, it’s either the Republican or the Democrat who’s going to win. If you vote for someone else your vote is going to be even more worthless than if you had contributed to either of the voting mobs. In voting, not conforming to what either of the two parties purports to believe is not what making a difference is. Sure, there was the whole Nader thing, but how’d that work out? Even if voting for Nader did make a difference, was how that worked out better or worse for the people who voted for him than if they hadn’t? Furthermore, the people who revolutionize society didn’t do it by voting, and they didn’t do it just by thinking for themselves. They did it by coming up with ideas that were radical to contemporaries but were either correct or else such that they were able to convince many others that they were correct. The odds that you or I or anyone either of us knows is going to come up with some idea that is not only worthy of changing society, but that ends up actually doing so are so low that they’re not even worth mentioning. I’m not going to crusade against not conforming to what society expects us to believe, but I will assert that doing that will certainly not make a world of difference. Do it because it’s good to be autonomous (at least as autonomous as it’s possible to be given how much one’s environment inevitably shapes one’s personality, opinions, and beliefs), and know that what happens on a societal scale will happen regardless of what you do or say or think, because c’mon, the odds of that not being true in any of our cases are very low indeed.
ReplyDeleteI like your connections and assertions made. I agree that people are too apathetic in nature, and need to learn the politics, go out, and vote. I have learned that that is the main reason that individuals do not vote, and was a reason why I did not want to, we do not know the politics and are too lazy to learn them. I am not sure about the connection to Kant, however, as i believe that it is not maturity that is holding people back from learning the politics, but rather people are too busy and just do not care enough. However, it is essential for individuals to learn these things to run an efficient, "enlightened" country.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the concept that the people feel as though their vote does not matter, so why go out and vote. Many people in this country are apathetic to the idea that their vote will get them heard and will show them that they are making a change in society. I also think there are many uninformed voters who do not fully understand what goes on in politics to make an enlightened decision, therefore choose to remove themselves from voting. While one person can say their vote doesn't matter or they feel apathetic toward politics because they do not like how politics is or maybe they just aren't informed, it still takes more than one person to make a difference. To show our president that we are unhappy as well as show the government, there needs to be a mass of society that agrees and either chooses to vote for that independent and not vote at all. If you are one person out of millions, your vote may not matter. Only if you get those millions together to work a common goal will you get the outcome that you so desire.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteYour post was very articulate and I really enjoyed reading it because I think you speak to everyone, all audiences through your message that we need to be “enlightened,” and empowered to make our voices heard. I agree with you and think its essential for people to vote because one vote can make a difference. It’s important to speak up in any circumstance, especially if you are passionate about making a change or sharing your idea with the rest of the world. I agree with you that people who say their vote doesn’t matter are in an “immature” state; however, as a young citizen, new to voting, I can understand why some citizens, particularly younger citizens, are conflicted with choosing a candidate because they might still be in the process of shaping their political perspectives. My favorite part of your post was your connection to all the leaders who “stepped outside of the box” to create change for the good of the country. I loved how you ended with all the leaders who went against the government during unjust times and demonstrated how they, Martin Luther King Jr., Abraham Lincoln, and Charles Darwin, are the ones to thank for bringing about positive changes. One individual can spark change, and with courage and persistence that individual is capable of making that change happen.
Interesting and timely article. Something that always bothers me about elections and voting is the amount of uneducated votes cast. Sure, I'd argue most people in the United States of America have the mental ability and intelligence level to be able to learn about candidates and to choose one that fits their life and ideals. Yet, I do believe that most votes are based on party affiliation or other factors that do not specifically highlight the policies of each candidate. As" immature" voters, people are not willing to look up and challenge current policies and beliefs. Some might be younger as you stated, but I believe that as young voters many are still undecided. Growing up in a moderately conservative household, voting Mitt Romney was not an auto-decision for myself and I thought about my life as a college student and had a difficult time choosing the candidate I liked best in the election. Another thing that bothers me is how apathetic people are. It might just be me but I believe that electoral college severely deters many from voting in either democrat heavy or republican heavy states.
ReplyDelete