This is my answer to an essay question that I submitted to my Political Science class. I recently read an article on how writing about politics in a negative way, or writing about government at all will put in you line to get assassinated by the government. I found it funny and exciting. I’ll give it a shot…
Question 5. Equality of Opportunity has regained relevance in recent times as a headpiece for protests and as a soapbox for public outcry, and discontentedness. Not surprisingly, the poor and rich classes of America have become more divided and surprisingly defined, increasingly through the depression and immoral corporate strategists/Lobbyist. What was once the American Dream has become a playbook for lawyers, corporate executives, and the rich to evade equal taxation and promote class disparity. Poverty, and what is considered the lower class, are one in the same. We are in an age where the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer, the restrictions on this type of movement are cryptic and ambiguous. People are fed up and that is why there are movements such as Occupy Wall Street to attempt to counter this catalyst as a whole.
One way to address the issue in a better way would be to strip government officials of the benefits of office if they do not fulfill their obligation to their people. If their people are not receiving the same rights and privileges that they receive then the person in office should be stripped of any benefits they would receive until the problem is resolved, or at least a majority of the public is satisfied. I believe a motivator would be living as those in poverty do, fully understanding where these people exist.
I also think another problem that America faces in terms of this problem would be where the information is provided, and if these elected officials are even receiving it, or if they choose to ignore it. I mean if you get your information here then… Nevermind.
I also think bipartisanship plays a huge part in this backwards movement; if a party is being paid off by the very corporations that the general public despises, then where do the elected officials motives lie. I think harsher penalties for capital based decisions would change the apathy in government, but then again maybe it would just cover it up a bit more.
Elected officials also care about their office and approval from their constituents, voters, and peers, so I believe the people who vote need to understand policy, and if those policies do not fit their personal motives then they should move to different party, or rather a different candidate, or run themselves. Whether or not the party is Democrat, Republican, or a Third Party Option, it should not matter as long as it appeals and benefits those who voting for that party. I believe there is such a loyalty to names and parties that individual’s general idea and general purpose get lost in spin reports and bad media.
The question is a very important question, but I feel that the solution lies within personal tenacity to find the truth, to find who and what benefits the American citizen in the best way. I feel that empty promises and “you owe it to us” ideals of politics really traps the public in a fixated state. I feel that politicians can be the anti-Christ to some, and the Lord himself to others. Here in lies the problem; with such a division in thought, can there really be a solution? The idea that there is merely one answer to this question is hard to grasp, what is harder to grasp is that there are only two parties that can be realistically elected, or so the general public thinks. I figure you have to solve the problem head on; people just need to open up a book, or a newspaper, or a trusted government site, and take a look for themselves at what truly affects their everyday lives and how they can change that for the better.