Compromises And Traditions In The United States

The United States was built on details and designed by compromises and traditions. Compromises and traditions are ideas the original writers of the United States Constitution felt would help ground future generations within the political arena and unite the country as a whole. A wide range of issues, including the checks and balances were written in order to deprive an individual government to impose their will on others. Americans were built on details that have been brought by two main political parties within the government, Republicans and Democrats. For decades, these two parties have been able to work together and unite in order and democracy. “More Americans seem to be separated by an unbridgeable chasm of beliefs, values and habits,
from politics to religion to culture and entertainments,” (Price) this separation within society causes a delusional thought process for people who should be focusing on the issues close to their beliefs, but instead have decided to choose a government political party. Issues and attitudes have further divided both Republican and Democratic parties into fractions that have caused parties to work independently amplifying the division within the U.S. Government, ultimately endangering the future of all U.S. citizens and the traditions of a democratic society. This history of polarization shows fault for the current state of affairs within the two parties. It’s extremely difficult to enact responsible policies on pressing challenges when there is a no compromise attitude within the parties. Both Democratic and Republican parties try to enforce what is logical and humane according to their political views, but ultimately have become less likely to compromise. Main issues that are pertinent to each party are as follows:
“ Democratic-run states have enthusiastically marketed “Obamacare” through state-run insurance exchanges; expanded Medicaid roles; legalized gay marriage and the use of marijuana for medicinal and recreational purposes; made union organizing easier; eased access to abortion; stiffened gun-control laws; allowed illegal immigrants to pay in-state tuition at public colleges and obtain driver's licenses; raised taxes; increased government spending; and adopted tougher environmental regulations” (Price). “Meanwhile, Republican-governed states have refused to open “Obamacare” exchanges or to expand Medicaid; opposed gay marriage; made it harder for unions to organize; trimmed the powers of public-employee unions; increased the number of places where guns can be carried; cut taxes and spending; and stiffened abortion restrictions beyond what the Supreme Court has permitted in past rulings in hopes the court will reverse Roe v. Wade” (Price).
As a result of not being able to compromise, a party may make a valid point, while the other party may view the valid point as “more alien, suspicious, and even threatening” (Price). Today, each party has divided further into individualistic views on issues pertinent to their party. This individualism is a result of people in the office looking out for themselves instead of taking responsibility for the people whose lives depend on the effectiveness of their decisions for issues they believe in. The American government or for that matter anyone that has anything to do with decision making in Washington, has a division so deep and so wide within the Republican and Democratic parties that increased unwillingness to compromise has caused a huge concern for decision making abilities within the government. The information age is here and causes words to be tossed around like hot potatoes. These words can become misconstrued by politicians who use social media as a way of retaliating or pointing out. Unfortunately, this thought process has caused unionization of parties to become individuals and for citizens to take sides.
If a professional were to act as politicians do in their workplace they would be terminated. American politicians don’t get fired they throw fits until they either get what they want or just leave to be rehired. “Unlike the British parliamentary system, the Constitution makes no provision for holding politicians accountable to one another. A rogue member of Congress can’t be “fired” by his party leaders, as a member of Parliament can; a renegade president cannot be evicted in a vote of no confidence, as a British prime minister can” (Rauch). The British parliamentary system may have some things the United States may want to consider in terminating party leaders. I believe without a doubt that if there is someone who is not fit for duty they should be terminated just like every other American not benefiting an employer. However, if the American people continue to let the words control their thoughts the idea of terminating may be another start of a civil war.
Bias information provided by radio and television was prohibited in the 1960s where, “networks could lose their licenses for biased or inaccurate reporting” (Strauss).
The type of information over the last thirty years has changed to fit wants and needs of the public. The invention of computers and cellular phones has dramatically changed how information is able to be attained and provided. People all over the world are able to research information on subjects they are interested in regardless of location, nationality, language and personality. There are many government conspiracies on tracking and storage of information through the computer ISP (Internet Service Provider) that help monitor trends. “Many ISPs compile anonymous browsing logs and sell them to marketing companies,” in other words, if marketing companies can use private information to their benefit why wouldn’t the government use the same information as a benefit to further their policies (privacypolicies.com). Millions of websites have a plethora of information and ideas that can help people grow, become racist or biased on opinions and views that sometimes stunts their thinking. Politicians undoubtedly use social media as a source of retaliating words back and forth at each other. Unfortunately, the retaliations and the back and forth stabbing of words effect people and their point of views distorting the truth of what the individual
believes.
Divides within American cities have predominantly become normal, but in the past thirty years’ divides have increased.
The divisions within the cities are traditionally neighborhoods where income based families “are moving into places where they are surrounded by like-minded individuals” (Price). Recent shifts within family demographics and economics has brought changes in American values and beliefs that are more apparent in the emphatic support for issues on, “climate change, vaccines, "death panels," the birthplace and religion of the president, and much else” (Moody). The change in biased support has a lot to do with radio, television and social media changing what “we want to believe, we selectively filter out information contradicting our preference” (Strauss). One of the most recent influential products of showcasing emotions and attitudes towards certain societal factors are the messages political leaders use to create a reaction. Politicians use celebrity endorsements and other influential people to sway those who are easily influenced by media and pick a side. People tend to unite when they feel moved by emotions, feelings, and thoughts unfortunately the unity can be a double edge sword causing either positive or negative
reactions.
Americans have always had a take hold and conquer attitude regardless of whose around and what the end result could be. Americans are always right, and the thought of someone taking what a god gave them since there isn’t a god anymore is unheard of just as long as the end result is in the best interest of self. Major influences of outside parties may be to blame for loopholes and scandals within our governments leadership their “philosophies and much more locked into our positions,” due to many governors contemplating running for president. They know they can’t get nominated if they stray too far from party orthodoxy” (Price). While networks claim to not have a biased attitude toward issues and the political system, it’s so hard to watch as they claw each other’s throats out and put it on repeat. The United States has one of the oldest written constitutions that is in used to govern our country. The civil war started because of politics. Political parties weren’t able to compromise and disputes with in the government went so far out of control it ended with the blood, sweat, and tears of thousands of brave men who died for a cause. Ultimately, this means an overhaul is needed to update our constitution, specifically the ability to terminate. We can impeach a president but there isn’t a whole lot that can be done for someone to put a lock down on the whole government, but we can let him run for president.
With all things considered unity and division needs to be a thing of the past, while there’s not a whole lot that can be done with mass media people can control themselves. Yes, it’s a first right amendment to have the freedom of speech but the one bringing words into the internet atmosphere can prevent biased opinions and by only state the facts instead of biased opinions. People who are bought to use words as a part of a marketing strategy to raise numbers for future presidential races need to leave. The government needs people who know the issues and can work to fix them at all different levels. We need people who can lead and not be intimidated and bent over bad corporate decisions. We the people is reason Americans can call this great nation one of the best places to not only raise a family, but have generations live on decisions made by people who could stand up for them.