Chapter 9 Dip on American Politics

After some sentimental talk about my involvement with the Liberal Party, I'm going to start talking about my campaign for Kerry.Before doing so, I would like to provide some background information and talk about American politics in general as I understand it. The first thing to emphasize is that the United States is an extremely complex country.She has a vast territory and a large population. Although it is not as large as China, its ethnic composition is much more complex than China: there are so-called social mainstream WASP (White Anglo-Saxon Protestant, Anglo-Saxon white Protestant), immigrants from other European countries, Negroes whose ancestors were sold as slaves,

There's the ongoing influx of Hispanics from Mexico and Central and South America, and there's Asians.These people from all over the world, with very different cultural traditions, came to the United States in different historical periods and for different reasons. Naturally, their views on society, the country, and politics will vary in thousands of ways, and even tit-for-tat.I've often thought I'd have to look up the American history books sometime and see if they missed a few Civil Wars in addition to the Civil War. For a country so complex, anyone who attempts to write about it in an article should probably be exiled to Alaska.So I must first declare that this article is full of omissions, just some of the most superficial personal feelings, which are shallower than "shallow talk".Secondly, since it is a personal feeling, it will inevitably bear a lot of imprints of my thoughts. In order to prevent being misled by my views, readers should read a few more descriptions of the United States by totalitarians after reading this article, so that there may be comparisons. comprehensive conclusion.

The United States is known as the "racial melting pot", so diversity can be said to be the biggest feature of the United States.Anyone who has read Wang Xiaobo's essays must be troubled by Russell's famous saying "variety is the source of happiness" that he quoted immediately.Thinking about it this way, the time he spent in Pittsburgh must have been very happy.When I first arrived in the United States, two things left a deep impression on me, which fully explained what "diversity" is. One is that there is no "American Mandarin".Chinese who have just arrived in the United States are generally troubled by their oral English, because they do not speak standard American English, just like they cannot speak Mandarin in China or BBC accent in the UK, and feel inferior.But soon I discovered that there is no such thing as "standard American English" at all. This term probably only exists on the covers of certain books in China.Even the newscasters of TV stations, such as New York TV stations, white people speak so-called "New York English", black people speak black English, and if they are guests from the south, they speak English with a southern accent, and everyone speaks their own. Yes, well water does not violate river water.Everyone confidently brings their own accent.Therefore, I now frankly say that my Chinese English is among many American English, Indian English, European English and even British English.

Another thing is that when I was a teaching assistant, I was teaching a recitation class for the first time. I was very apprehensive, so I asked an American friend how to lead a recitation class.She talked about the issues that should be paid attention to, and finally said: "The most important thing is to be yourself (Beyourself)." This statement made me fresh for a long time.I always thought that there should be a practice or regulation in the department for things like recitation classes, one, two, three, four, five, and it would clearly explain how to take the class.Unexpectedly, how to lead a class is entirely up to the teacher himself.I am still very grateful for the phrase "be yourself" she told me, often cited as the basis for myself to jump out of the stereotypes and do my own way.

The source of diversity is respect for the individual.What follows must be "tolerance", because if people do not tolerate different opinions, diversification cannot be realized, and it is inevitable that "all horses are silent" and the thinking is fixed on one.In the United States, both the Nazi Party and the Ku Klux Klan are legal. In the 1960s, the Nazi Party was once banned. American human rights organizations believed that their rights should also be protected and appointed a lawyer to defend them.The lawyer is Jewish.The lawsuit went all the way to the Supreme Court, and the justices ruled 5:4 that the Nazi Party also had freedom of belief and speech.Similarly, the lawyer who defended the Ku Klux Klan was black. This is probably the best example of "I don't agree with you, but I will defend your right to speak to the death."In terms of religion, the United States is extremely free, full of all kinds of strange sects, and they all fully enjoy their own freedom of belief.The polygamous Mormons, the Jehovah's Witnesses who directly call God's name, and the Davidic sect who believe in the leader are all kinds of things, and everything is as lively as a farmers' market.As long as they do not break the law, they are free to preach.The Branch Davidians were besieged because of their possession of firearms and their refusal to be investigated by federal agents.That siege was also a source of trouble for a long time by human rights organizations because it borrowed military resources.

However, in contrast to its political and religious tolerance, the United States is less tolerant of personal life.For example, among the 50 states in the United States, 49 states prohibit prostitution, and only Nevada, where the casino city of Las Vegas is located, allows prostitution.Another example is the "gay marriage" incident that has caused a lot of noise recently. Bush threatened to amend the constitution to prohibit it. It really makes people look at the conservative degree of the United States with admiration.These are not a problem in many European countries, and even Canadians in North America don't take it seriously.

This fully demonstrates the true nature of the right wing in American society.Historically, early immigrants from Central and Western Europe, who constituted the mainstream of American society, came to the United States for two main reasons: one was the religious persecution they suffered in the Old World; the other was the longing for economic opportunities in the New World.Although they are mainly Protestants, they have various denominations. Moreover, they still have lingering fears about the religious persecution they have suffered. Therefore, they advocate freedom of belief in the New World, as well as the freedom of the press and freedom of speech brought about by it.But at the same time, since they are all devout Christians, they have very strict moral requirements and are very self-disciplined in their personal life.The pompous lifestyle of European courts is incompatible with these poor and lower-middle peasants.

Economically, the New World was not fully developed at that time, and as long as individuals worked hard, they had a great chance of success. This is the "American Dream" that is still circulating today.Therefore, they oppose the state's intervention in the economy, and believe that the economy should be free competition, driven by individuals' desire for wealth, rather than planned by the state. This constitutes the main position of the American right: personal moral conservatism and economic freedom.They advocate low taxes, small government, and an emphasis on individual struggle.Since they are the vested interests of the society, they tend to maintain the existing social order and instinctively guard against emerging ideas.

Originally, the United States was simply a paradise for rightists, but unfortunately in addition to these mainstream societies, there are other people of all kinds in the United States.For example, the blacks who were trafficked as slaves were politically free after they were liberated, but economically they were "poor and white." The "American Dream" still exists, but how can the descendants of slaves compete with the descendants of slave owners?The labor of their ancestors was occupied by others without compensation, and they were naturally at a disadvantage in the competition.The descendants of white gentlemen must make compensation for this. Although they cannot re-sell themselves to blacks as slaves, the United States has begun to implement "affirmative acts" and "anti-discrimination laws", requiring schools and companies to recruit personnel and ethnic groups in the population Combination of composition allows ethnic minorities to be admitted preferentially under the same conditions.At the same time, the government has raised taxes and provided benefits to those who have no means of living.

The turbulent 1960s is undoubtedly the nightmare of all rightists in the world, especially for Americans.In addition to the struggle of ethnic minorities for human rights, the United States also staged "feminist movement", "anti-war movement" and, of course, "sexual liberation".This is completely contrary to the concept of the right.In terms of economy, Roosevelt's New Deal began to intervene in the economy as early as the 1930s, and big governmentism has already gained a place in the United States.Leftist forces have flourished in the United States, the stronghold of the world's rightists.Its main forces are ethnic minorities, the poor, young people, intellectuals.The main position of the left is: personal life should be free, the economy should be intervened by the state, and the disadvantaged should be compensated.

The two-party politics in the United States is a reflection of the confrontation between the left and the right.The Republican Party represents the right wing and is the spokesperson of the so-called "mainstream society". They believe that raising taxes to provide welfare to the poor is a kind of exploitation of the working class, which hurts people's enthusiasm for work, and eventually encourages everyone to stop working and sit down. Waiting for relief at home.Excessive state intervention in the economy will cause the economy to become rigid and completely lose its vitality.At the same time, their ideas are conservative, they have a high sense of identity and honor for the country, they regard anti-war people as traitors to the country (American traitors), they hate sexual liberation, and they attach great importance to traditional family values.The members of the Republican Party are mostly the middle class and the rich, and they represent the vested interests of this society.The values ​​represented by the Republican Party are the mainstream of the United States, so they are also called "conservatives." The views of the Democratic Party are almost completely opposite to theirs (of course, in terms of basic human rights such as freedom of belief, the whole of the United States is consistent).They are deeply influenced by the left-wing thoughts from the European continent, and believe that the state should intervene in the economy and use planning to regulate the economy to avoid blind economic development.At the same time, they emphasize equality, and believe that the state should take care of the vulnerable groups and not overly divide the rich and the poor.In terms of personal affairs, they believe that as long as they don't hurt others, individuals have the right to handle all their own affairs, without the guidance of society or the state-I don't believe in God, or am I gay, and what the hell do I do?In the eyes of traditional Americans, these views are deviant, so they are called "liberal", that is, "open-minded people", also known as "liberals" or neo-liberals. But this "liberal" is not the same as the "Libertarian (or classical liberal)" to which I belong.Liberals are between the left and right, basically they want the freedom of personal affairs of the left and the freedom of economic affairs of the right, and oppose the state intervention of the left in the economy and the traditional moral constraints of the right.Because Liberals demand freedom both personally and economically, they are considered too radical by both the left and the right to have much influence in the United States.Americans still feel that it is either personal freedom, economic planning, or economic freedom and social tradition.One foot is his own, and the other foot is on the crutch of the state, so that he can walk.If you follow your own temperament with both feet, you are afraid that you will go astray, right?Therefore, some people half-jokingly said: The Liberal Party is very good, but the American people are not smart enough.It seems that the theory of special national conditions exists both in China and abroad. In my opinion, there is no such thing as right and wrong.Originally, as a Chinese, I was familiar with "Don't worry about the few but worry about the inequality" since I was a child. Even without the education I received in political and Chinese classes, I still felt that the leftists were more natural and correct than the rightists.However, on the one hand, when I was growing up, the surrounding environment was also undergoing drastic economic reforms and the resulting earth-shaking changes in concepts; I also read more books than before, and then my thoughts began to break away from the leftist, and moved towards the direction of freedom in the middle. There is a saying in the West that if a person is not a leftist before the age of 20, he has no conscience; if he is still a leftist after the age of 30, he has no brains.I think that speaks part of the essence of the problem.Young people are rebellious in character, demanding personal freedom, full of ideals and compassion, and are easily moved by words such as "equality" and "rights". They are the backbone of the left.When they grow up, they will gradually realize the rationality of traditional morality and the emptiness of beautiful words, and they will gradually become rightists.When people are old, they will naturally be more conservative. From an international point of view, the famous rightist countries are the United States and the United Kingdom. The mainstream ideology is pragmatism. Romantic, easily impulsive.This is probably another footnote to the left and right. In the United States, the right-wing Republican Party can be said to be the mainstream consensus in society, but the left-wing Democratic Party is supported by the poor and liberals. The 2000 presidential election was the closest election in American history, so it can also be said to be the clearest illustration of the division of power between the two parties in the United States.It can be clearly seen from the map that the Republicans have won the conservative and traditional South and Midwest, while the Democrats have won the Northeast, which is known as the stronghold of liberalism, the central industrial area centered on Chicago, and the central region centered on California. West Coast (UC Berkeley is considered the most liberal university in the United States). The electoral system in the United States is very special. It is not the candidate who gets the most votes in the general election, but the votes are counted separately in each state. Except for Maine and Nebraska, the winner of each state will get the state. All of the Electoral College votes (that is, the state's total votes in both houses of Congress).If a candidate loses heavily in some states and wins in others, he could lose the overall vote to his opponent and still win the general election. Personally, I think this design is unreasonable.Its original intention was to prevent the voices of small states from being overwhelmed by large states, but the situation in 2000 showed that such a design did not achieve its purpose. At the end of the 2000 counting, Bush and Gore were nearly tied, and Florida and several other small states had yet to be voted out.But at that time, everyone no longer cared about the situation in those small states at all, and focused all their attention on Florida, which had 25 electoral college votes, because all the electoral college votes in those small states added up would not be enough. Not as much as Florida.If the electoral system is based on the majority of the popular vote, there will be no such situation where the small state does not matter. Four years have passed, and the bipartisan divide in the United States has not been healed, but has intensified.Bush's staunchly Republican stance has won him the heartfelt affection of Republicans and the fury of Democrats and other liberals.Now it seems that the main spheres of influence of the two parties have not changed much. The South and Midwest will still support Bush, and the Northeast and West Coast will still support Kerry.The main battlefield will still be in Florida, as well as some marginal states with a large number of electoral college votes, such as Ohio and Pennsylvania. In my opinion as a Liberal, the Democrats and the Republicans have sides that I support and sides that I oppose.I agree with the Democratic Party's idea of ​​individual liberty, but I oppose their idea of ​​big government. I am more inclined to the Republican Party in terms of economic policy.Comparing the two, my equality complex finally played a role, and it is difficult to accept the relative indifference of the Republican Party to the disadvantaged. Therefore, if I have to choose between the two parties, I will choose the Democratic Party. Today's situation has changed again. The Republicans in the White House are no longer the Republicans we are familiar with, but the so-called "neoconservatives."On the one hand, they still adhere to conservative religious and social values, such as opposing gay marriage and emphasizing devout worship of God; In the name of anti-terrorism, the "Patriot Act" was introduced, allowing government departments to legally violate citizens' privacy and even human rights.All of this takes away from the Republican Party's original attraction to me.So, in this year's presidential election, I'll be campaigning for Kerry and doing my part to get Bush out of the White House.Although I don't fully agree with Kerry's policy, democracy is to choose the less bad of the two devils, not to find a perfect king.