We live in a world shaken by political divisions, and it is even more apparent during an election year. Across the world political divisions have spawned destructive campaigns of genocide and slaughter that inevitably promote more of the same. It seems to be a never ending cycle of poverty creation and attempted consolidation. Fortunately the United States does not have violent political movements, but we are in our own type of civil war. A war that stems from Washington D.C. that disperses throughout state levels and then trickles into local governments. The political wars of the United States seem to be following the same cycle that those violent ones abide by. Every four years or so, a new set of political figureheads will arise in our country and say "I'm the candidate that will unite America" and brag about their bipartisan philosophy. Just as the bipartisan message president Bush sent to the democratic congress failed, these ideas seem to fail every time and enter into that ongoing cycle of seperation and attempted consolidation. I sincerely believe that the United States needs to end this political war to enable itself to effectively aid in the larger conflicts.
Iraq is a perfect example of a country shaped by political controversy. They are divided on religous views that then escalate to those political divisions. The political universe is where all solutions to the worlds problems rest, untouched by any nation. Even religous conflicts, like in Iraq, can be solved by piecing together the puzzle of political confusions. The effects of unity, in a political world will sober the hatred that compells individuals, for any reason in any society. The United States needs this unity, to then be able to go and promote the idea further, to countries that physically destroy the foundations on which they were built and annihilate humans they judge. To stop violent wars we have to aid in our own non-violent ones.
At the core of unity, is compliance, that should spread to become motivation. Compliance is where the problem stems. It seems that the majority of people look at politcal candidates as "right" or "wrong". These two extremes and far sides of the spectrum are where our politcal divisions occur. The key is not to look for candidates who fully fulfill your personal agenda (because they're not out there) but to look for candidates who are most agreeable. Compliance is what we don't understand. The idea, that if they don't agree with exactly what I believe they aren't getting my vote, is flawed on so many levels. The happy medim is the solution to our political differences. The compliant politician is the best poliltician. This is why I ask, are you a Democan or a Republocrat?
I mean, why do we have parties in the first place? The constant contention between political parties is another thing that brings balance to the political system, like the pendulum effect. Politics is all about compromise, but what is there to compromise over if there's no contention? Instead our nation will follow some hapless stream through history, ending up who knows where! No, I think the contention between political parties is a good thing, and it is our duty to vote for who best represents what we want our government to be.
I agree but we don't even know what we want to be at this point! We intervene into a nations affairs prematurely to set up a democracy? In the middle east? It doesn't make sense but the strongest point I would like to accent is the idea that compromise isn't treason. Many people disagree because they know they can. Rather than disagreeing and compromising to promote a better country. The war in Iraq is a great example of the United States discombobulation with it's politics and ideals.