A Voters Guide To Analyzing Political Arguments. Engage in Politics!

[Steve B]

What does the "stench" of politics "smell like" to you?  My purpose is not to make people cynical here, but I think we really lack the lenses for recognizing when special interest groups are trying to interfere in the will of the people.

Here is a voters guide for analyzing politics (in general).

Step 1)  Follow The Money

One of the first questions you should ask about a candidate is "who is funding their campaign?"  It is impossible to run for office without financing.  The money has to come from somewhere.  What this money means is that the candidate will do what he says except in cases when doing it would conflict with the interests of his special interest donors.

If you learn this "dirty secret" about American politics. . . you are well on your way to becoming a more educated voter.

Step 2) Judge Them By Their Actions, Not Their Words

Remember. . . the media, in most countries, also tends to be controlled by "big money."  They will automatically spin a negative narrative against a candidate if these special interest groups feel as though their special interests are being threatened by the candidate.

This, alone, does not automatically mean that some of the negative narrative is not based in legitimate concerns. . . but you should still be aware of such motives whenever reading negative narratives.

Step 3)  Not Just Money, But Ideologies

While money certainly does influence the positive and negative narratives of any given candidate.  Realize that there are also underlying ideologies that are driving those narratives.  You need to learn far left, middle-left, middle right, and far right wing, theories so that you can spot these.  Engage these paradigms.  Consider the foundational ideas that they are based in.  And realize that "Big Money" will support both sides for sake of private interests.

Step 4) Be Cynical.  But Don't Be Too Cynical

Interests (both financial and ideological) can conflict.  But also realize that those interests (financial and ideological) can come together as well.  Reflect on your own ideology.  Be cynical, but don't be so cynical so as to discount that financial, and ideological, interests can not find some kind of a win-win relationship.  As an example, King Cyrus was a pagan, but the prophet Daniel (and all of the Jewish people) celebrated him for his policies toward the Jews.

Even though Cyrus was, obviously, only acting out of interests for the Persian Empire at the time.

"I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves." 

-- Mathew 10:16

Step 5) Thicken Your Skin.  Political Season Can Be Nasty Business

Only once you see the underlying financial, and ideological, conflicts of interest will you be able to "toughen up" to withstand the world of politics and objectively analyze their underlying forces-- whilst never betraying your own integrity (regardless of your political views). 

Step 6)  Never Let the Nastiness of Politics Jade You

This is the hardest part.  We are so poorly trained in how to disagree with others, that we often allow our emotions to overtake us.  Then we walk away jaded.  Make a commitment, right now, regardless of your political views, regardless of if you are Atheist or Christian, to not let this happen to you.  Too many people are not voting.  Too many are not engaged in the process.  Democracy only works if people are engaged and educated about the issues.  This is a big reason why I advocate changes to our system such as "run off" and "MMP" voting. They are systems of voting that prevent people from feeling as if their voice is not equally heard.

But the irony is that we need people to be more engaged in order to bring about such changes to the way we do democracy.  The more disengaged people become, the more we risk outsourcing our Republic to an Oligarchy (similar to what has happened in Russia).

In short, we risk losing our Republic by causing people to feel jaded.  More than anything, it is the feeling of jadedness that we must actively fight against. . . even if we have some justification for feeling jaded. . . don't let those feelings seep in.  You have inherited freedoms that very few people enjoy.  You owe it to those who passed you this inheritance to engage in the political subjects of the day and vote on them to the best of your ability.

How To Talk About Divisive Issues?

He's a secular (non-Christian) thinker.  And I've always admired him for the way he explains the civic life.  I think it is exactly consistent with what our founders envisioned.  God bless.

The Lost Art of Democratic Debate

[Steve B]

And by the way.  In the video I linked, Dr. Sandel proposes three political / moral choices as case-studies for engaging in democratic debate.  My answers to his three questions are as follows:

1. Put the flutes on auction.  Yes, the flutes should go to the most talented musicians.  But the market place will naturally guide them to this talent.
2. The organizer of the golf tournament decides - after all it is their tournament.
3.  The government should not sanction love just as it doesn't sanction friendship.  If you want get married? Go to your priest or lawyer or whoever else it is you want to endorse your marriage.  Me, personally, I look to God. . . quite simply because I see Jesus' as credible.

But my answers are founded in underlying, ideological, right wing theories.  The one thing that defines right wing theory is minimal government.  I think the government should only interfere in society as a last resort, not as a first resort.  So for example:

If people do not see Jesus as a moral authority figure, I'm not going to ask the government to force them.

If people don't like the PGA's policies, then leave the PGA. . . don't ask the government to make them bend the knee.

And the flutes will naturally find their way to the best musicians through the market place.  Again, the government is not needed.  It should stay out of it.

[Steve B]

Also.  The point here is not to talk about any particular issue.  But to talk about how we dissect issues.  I put forward three completely separate issues purely as case-studies to demonstrate how right wing methodologies may be applied consistently across a broad spectrum of political issues.

Jesus taught us to "love your neighbor as yourself."  But, obviously, this includes us taking into account how our actions will ultimately affect others.  That's what right wing, and left wing, theory attempt to describe.  So if we love our neighbor, we ought to engage these two paradigms sincerely in order to try and realize their practical implications on our neighbor.

[Steve B]