I had a conversation the other day with some adult classmates
during a break in biology class. I can’t remember the exact topic of discussion
but it had a sociopolitical element to it. We were not exactly arguing gun
control but it was related to citizens’ rights.
I made some sort of remark about how people should be
allowed to do what they want as long as they are not hurting anyone else. One of
the participants in the discussion, a woman in her thirties, said that she
would not feel safe in a country where that was allowed.
“I don’t want to be safe,” I replied. “I want to be free.”
After I said it, I realized that I had put my finger on the
real social, cultural and political divide that is heating things up right now.
I am not pretending that you can divide the entire population of the United States
into two groups. By now in our history, the picture of the American population is
truly kaleidoscopic. However, the distinction between two ways of thinking
about government and freedom are the real causes behind the rancor in politics
today.
Freedom or Safety
Some of us want to be free. We do not want anyone to tell us
what to do. We accept that this means
that no one will be there to help us, either. That’s okay, this segment of the population
says. Let us sink or swim.
On the other hand,
some of us believe that the government has more responsibility. It should make
us safe. For the most part, this segment of the population wants the government
to act like a parent and guide our actions. It is not enough to simply forbid
hurting others and punish those who do so. The government must prevent anyone
from committing crimes.
If I Were President…
There is certainly a segment of the population that would
take it one step further. A young girl in that biology class learned from the
professor that prolonged exposure to the UV rays in a tanning bed could bind
adjacent thymine nucleotides in your DNA and spur mutations. She announced that,
if she were President, she would shut those places down. The professor loudly
remarked that this was the United States of America and we had a little thing
called freedom. Kudos to the professor.
The dictatorial powers that she thinks that the President
has (or should have) are alarming enough but they are topics for another essay.
The point that stuck with me was that she thought the President should act like
a father and guide the actions of his children toward safe choices.
The Founding Population
There were many currents of thought running through the
founding population of the United States. Not everyone was fighting to get rid
of a king. Many victorious Americans, at the end of the Revolution, wanted George
Washington to be the new king. Others wanted something closer to what the French
would disastrously try to implement in the next few decades.
However, there was definitely a strong element who wanted
nothing to do with the way of life that had been common to European peasants
for centuries. These ancestors had lived in straitened circumstances and looked
to aristocrats for their protection. While there was also much admirable self-sufficiency
among peasants, they definitely placed an onus of responsibility on their noble
overlords. These leaders were expected to make things right and keep them safe.
The Americans in the country were mostly first or second generation
immigrants who wanted to support themselves. They were content, even thrilled,
to leave behind the superstructure of authority that had watched over their
actions if it meant that they could live as they pleased.
Sometime between then and now, our population has undergone
a drastic change. Probably very few of us, even the most diehard libertarians,
are prepared to live as self-sufficiently as those ancestors did. Many
Americans seem to want the government to take charge and tell them how to be
safe. The topic of the next essays will be a study of the two centuries of
change that have altered the political and cultural landscape of the United States
of America.
No comments:
Post a Comment