..The Two Goals of Politics At Large.
Published on January 13, 2005 By Solnac In Politics
Desperate for changing/Starving for truth/Closer where i Started/Chasing after you -Lifehouse, Hanging By A Moment (which, admittedly, has nothing to do with politics, but that first stanza fits nicely here.)

Whether you're left, right, or somewhere in the middle, you've got one thing going for you if your particular passion is politics: you want to create your own ideal world through the masses. I'm not saying it's a bad thing necessarly, but even the most conservative politico will get dreamy eyed over the thought there might be a capitalist system somewhere where everyone is working hard on getting rich, and everyone has the opportunity to do so.

Liberals are the most guilty of this, I guess, considering we're often pegged as 'idealistic' and 'dreamers'. My parents, the loving people that they are, instilled in me that government should be a system that works directly for the people, to help their hurts and soothe them, and that sort of was the cornerstone of my thinking today. Even now, I see tradegies like the tsunami as the growing signs that the world needs to govern itself, and not by any failed experiment such as the United Nations. You may not agree with me and think I'm Marxist, you may believe that countries, cities and governments are self-reliance systems that should be largely left alone, but that's not really the point I'm making here.

The point is, and Myrrander helped me lift my writers block with one of his articles on Che Guevara (thank you, Myrr!), that when you reach out and touch someone with a piece, no matter how small your audience, or do something to change the world, you're trying to establish your own utopia within the system, and walking the path you take, finding your beliefs and keeping the faith when they're challenged, so to speak, is your own personal political enlightment system (and in some ways, can help your spirituality as well). Utopia is an ideal obtainable only if everyone can find their own place in it, enlightment is useless if you cannot find someone to share your wisdom with.

Will we find utopia? Or, at least our own personal version of it? Will the governments we wish to espouse most keenly be attainable within our generation? If we all act in some way, then possibly. The reason for life is unfathomable, like the previous questions, but it doesn't stop me from trying to find that out either.

And to take this away from philosphy and spirituality for a minute, this is also why I want the War in Iraq to be unintenonally successful in one of it's stated goals--to bring a greater sense of government to the Iraqi people, so they can have the clay to mold utopia with however they like. Now that we're there, we're responsible for what happens to them and for them shaping their own destiny (Wow, that sounds flowery). The fact we're all given this clay in this country, from blogs to documentries to being a Congressman or a President, is what makes this country a great one. Will we succeed in this task? And how bad does it have to get before I have to reconsider my optimistic position and decide the safety of our troops, of many members of my generation dying so they have the same? There aren't easy answers, and the questions get harder to ask.

But in the words of an old hymn, take your candle--and go light your world.

Yours in Struggle For Enlightment And Truth, the AWM/wolf dragon,

Sol

PS--I'll start writing about news stories when there's new stuff to publish politically. The news has been scant, and I've seen everything I've wanted to cover, covered.

Comments
on Jan 14, 2005
Solnac, beautiful article. I agree that the "utopia" for me will be different than the "utopia" for draginol, for instance. Of course, the tricky part is getting a utopias wherein all parties benefit and are happy, and without one utopia infringing upon the other. I also believe that the government is an institution to protect its citizens and its lands, rather than just simply following a business model.

The conservative business model implies that only a few at the top really benefit.

The liberal utopia is one of a more balanced benefit to all its citizens, wherein those at the top do not benefit off the backs of those at the bottom.

The conservative utopia would like to think that their economic benefits, even if skewed to the few at the top is not "off the backs" of those at the bottom, but rather that there will always be those at the bottom for whom we cannot provide, so why bother spending tax dollars trying.

The liberal utopia feels that we must always try to help those at the bottom, even if it may cost more for those at the top. Why do those at the top have to own so much money, more than they can ever spend, anyway?

The conservative utopia is one based on stricly market driven issues, capitalism in all its glory.

The liberal utopia is more socialist in that it tries to spread the wealth among citizens, even though capitalism must drive the ship, to a large degree.

The conservative utopians believe the earth is there for the taking, to exploit its resources at will to guide the capitalist ship, by developing a conservationist model at best..

The liberal utopians feel that the earth must be preserved for future generations, even if the monetary cost to society is large. Preservation v. Conservation.

I could go on and on in how I view the differences between liberal and conservative utopias, but I think you get the point. I just don't know how to bridge the gap, wherein all parties are happy. People keep talking about compromise, coming to the center, reaching middle grounds. I know that is ultimately the only way to reach any modicum of consensus, but I just cannot give up, or back away from my core beliefs. Nor can you. Nor can draginol or other conservatives. So, that middle ground, the compromise and consensus remains elusive. ---------sigh--------------