Opinions

Political labels just get in the way

A political science professor at a small private college reviews final exam results with his American Government 101 class. The essay question asked:

"What is your political persuasion, conservative or liberal? Present arguments in defense of your position."

"I can't say I'm thrilled with your performance on the exam," the professor told the class. "How many of you defended a conservative position?"

Fourteen students raised their hands.

"And a show of hands for those who took the liberal side?"

Twenty-five hands went up.

"What about you two in the back?"

ADVERTISEMENT

"Us?"

"Yes… with the hoodies. On what side of the political aisle did you lean?"

"Uh, we're anarchists. We don't believe in government. We just needed the three credits."

"And what about you, in the front…I believe it's Baxter?  I didn't see your hand go up. Are you also an anarchist?"

"No. I believe we need a government."

"So, what are you, liberal or conservative?"

I'm first and foremost a human being.  I don't believe in labels."

"But you must lean toward one part of the political spectrum. Are you a Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Socialist, Green Party advocate?"

"No, I don't believe in being pigeonholed and labeled. There are some aspects in each of those that I embrace."

[Fundamental political question doesn't change: Who gets the money?]

"So you believe that a government can support expansive social programs while having a robust, free-market economy?  In other words, you don't see a conflict between a government that taxes to support a liberal social agenda, and a conservative, capitalistic system that believes in less taxation and more individual responsibility with stronger states' rights?"

"No conflict. We run into trouble when we stereotype individuals and groups and use names loosely to put people into categories. If we have someone pegged as a conservative or liberal before entering into a discussion with them, we won't even try to listen. In such situations there is no room for negotiation or compromise. I think the labels, particularly liberal and conservative, are essentially obsolete."

"But Mr. Baxter, through this course you have learned about the evolution of America's two-party political system and its underlying ideologies. Responsible citizens must carefully weigh and choose their political posture – whether they deign to align with right or left."

"I do."

"Do you align with right or left?"

"Both."

"But you can't – it's fundamentally impossible. Do you believe the Reagan style "trickle down economics" worked for the betterment of all Americans?"

ADVERTISEMENT

"No."

"Then you believe in a big tax and spend federal government, less states' rights, with expansive social welfare programs?"

"No."

"I'm finding it difficult to resolve just what you believe in, Mr. Baxter."

"With due respect, professor, it's because you're not listening. Nobody listens to each other these days, especially our elected leaders. They're hung up on liberal and conservative labels and channeling themselves into narrow, prescribed agendas.

"America has the technology and resources — both human and material — to do both: we can have a strong national defense, a robust, free-market economy that powers our country's economic engine; and progressive social programs—including a major upgrade of education and health care, Veteran Administration programs and programs for senior citizens."

"You could do all of that without major increases in personal and corporate taxes?"

"There might be some tax increases on the ultra-rich to kick-start education to better prepare people for 21st century jobs—and to implement a major U.S. infrastructure renewal program. But successful business people know a lot about risk management. I think even the very wealthy would agree it's better to risk some capital on the front end to educate Americans for these jobs and build up the middle class, rather than pay endlessly for more police, judges and prisons on the back end."

"And you think this can all be done in one presidential administration… with a divided Congress that is perpetually in the doldrums?"

"It might take a decade or so for America's economic engine to get firing on all cylinders, especially if we ramp up manufacturing in the U.S. and secure a better balance of trade abroad. We might reach a time when most of our population achieves a middle-class standard of living. Or how about this novel idea:  we might even become a country that helps those who can't help themselves."

[A plea to moderates: Don't stand by and let Alaskans suffer the whims of a few]

"You're an idealist. With globalization and automation there won't be enough jobs for everyone. We won't have enough tax revenue to fund all of things you want to do."

"I disagree. With our country's current dominance in technology, we can and will create many more jobs – jobs that we can't even conceive of yet. I think it's realistic to be a bit idealistic when it comes to our future. Positive attitudes got us to the moon and mapped the genome.

"We will do a lot more as a country if we adopt a can-do attitude, and elect leaders who have the ability to listen to one another."

"You're overlooking the power of money and how it influences elections. To get re-elected, candidates must march in lockstep with the party line. You will find no listeners or compromise-makers, or moderates in a system controlled by lobbyists shilling for deep-pocketed special interests."

"Term limits, repeal of Citizens United to limit campaign spending, tighter controls on lobbyists, could go a long way toward removing money from politics."

"I still don't understand why you can't simply address the exam question, Mr. Baxter. Why you can't explain why you're conservative or liberal."

"Because if I hang one of those labels around my neck there will be many who will be reluctant to discuss issues with me. Today people live in information silos. They seek only information that reinforces their existing views, leaving no room for discourse and reasonable debate.

"If we simply approached each other as human beings, and not preassigned political nomenclatures, we might begin to bridge the divide that now separates us. And if our politicians were bold enough to try this, they might stand a chance at reaching some agreement on how to solve important issues of the day."

"You're a college freshman. If you've thought of all this, don't you think others have as well?"

ADVERTISEMENT

"Sure. But they're lazy. Compromising and finding solutions is a lot harder work than simply voting 'no'."

"You've given me something to think about," the professor mused. He looked out at the class.  "I gave most of you C's, except for the two guys in the back, with the hoodies."

"You flunked us?"

"No, I gave you both B's. For anarchists, if that's what you call yourselves, your representation of progressive liberalism was impressive."

"I'm only awarding one A — that's to Mr. Baxter — who is apparently a political horse of no color,  or every color."

"And finally, I'm only assigning one F, and that's to myself, for being so dogmatic and narrow-minded. Perhaps for too many years I've been looking at American politics from inside my own kind of self-styled silo. Class dismissed."

Frank E. Baker is a freelance writer who lives in Eagle River.

 

Frank Baker

Frank E. Baker is a freelance writer who lives in Eagle River.

ADVERTISEMENT