JCTownsley.com

Alright… I wrote an email tonight for a listserv my US Government Class has. For the fun of it I post it here also. It is in response to an Op.Ed. piece in the Oregonian and also in response to classmates emails… enjoy

March 11th, 2003
Wow… well I have a lot of thoughts to spew out tonight on our second question. Unfortunately I have no recognizable order to them, so bear with me.

First of all, let me state that I am what many would call an “Idealist,” when it comes to politics and humanity. I won’t go into this in detail but I bring it up because my idealism rests in humanity: that is the power of the people. I have a very unique opinion on Iraq, 9/11, terrorism, and Mr. Bush, however this is not the forum to really discuss that right now.

I agreed with many parts of Lopez’s article. Real briefly:

I agree that in our country “divided we stand.” however, I believe, like many of you, that the freedom and power lies in the fact that we can be divided. And in that ability to have our own opinions lies unity. So yes, we are a divided nation, but because of that, we are united.

I agree with Lopez’s public forum idea. I try and have faith in our elected officials, both congress and the president. However I do not think that there is adequate representation of what the public truly wants. We live in a country where you elect officials by political view, then trust that your elected official will carry out the political views elected on. The problem with that, is that our country and world are always changing, and so accordingly are the views of the people. A more public forum of sorts would allow the general public to cause more change.

Many people have dissagreed with Lopez on the elephant in the room statement. People believe that there is dissent out there and that american’s really are protesting. I agree, some people are getting their voices out. However, I agree with Lopez that it is not enough. If portland has a population of over 1 million people, and statistically some 40 percent or so dissagree with the war, then 400,000 people should be saying so. Yet only 20,000 are. You do the math. This is not to say that I am being vocal, because I am not. However in a truly democratic state, we would care more about what is going on and get off our lazy butts and do something, whether pro-war or anti-war.

Two more thoughts: Not to single out somebody, but travis remarked in an email about it being too late to change Bush’s mind about war and that there is no reason to protest. Being an “idealist,” this statement to me represents the true problem in our country. People do not have faith in the ability of change. The very fact that Bush is so adimant about war is all the more reason for those against it to speak out. When the masses begin to believe, then real change will occur.

Lastly… I want to use this email list as an example. With both questions we have had this term, most (here me say most) responses have all been the same. Either for or against, agreeing or dissagreeing. What irks me (and yes, I fit into this category also) is that our responses are written 1) pressured by our peers to fit in and 2) solely to get the work done and get a grade. Excuse my poor prose tonight, but this is a prime example of our country. We are lazy. We just want to fit in and get on with our lives. We just want to make the grade and move on to more important things. People don’t have the guts to stick there neck out there and really stir up the pot. Yet that is what democracy needs to really work. Our president and congress are not elected to run the government, but to Represent the people. And unless we as a country begin to really discuss the situation (like lopez has suggested) then we will head down that road that history warns us against.

Ok, enough said. Debate all this if you like, in fact I encourage it… wasn’t that my point?

Josh Townsley