OPINION & EDITORIAL
In politics, use your head, not your heart
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Hannah Shtein:
- Abortion 'facts' flat out immoral (November 20, 2007)
- Forget the base: Take middle path on voter issues (November 6, 2007)
- In politics, use your head, not your heart (October 23, 2007)
- UW making big mistake with quota (October 9, 2007)
- Timetable experts not 'world citizens' (September 26, 2007)
Related Stories:
- Dissecting Obama-mania (March 12, 2007)
- Idealism on tap at Obama fundraiser (October 16, 2007)
- Dems field diverse candidates (February 7, 2007)
- Barack Obama: Political St. Nick (October 15, 2007)
- Obama: Visionary, not fraudulent (September 19, 2007)
by Hannah Shtein
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
At the recent Barack Obama rally, the charming and amiable presidential hopeful presented his plans for the direction he wants to take the nation and stated what he aims to accomplish during his time as president — things such as providing universal health care and getting the troops out of Iraq, among other pressing issues. Except he didn’t actually lay out any plans; rather, he simply outlined what he means to do and said nothing regarding howhe plans to do it. Which is fine; he can tell us how he means to execute these aims later. What is not fine, however, is that I heard countless thrilled affirmations of faith in Mr. Obama’s candidacy, based solely on the content of his address, as I left the rally.
Let’s pause for a moment. Mr. Obama’s speech showed that he is a viable candidate for the presidency because … he’s charismatic? He seems like a nice guy? He wantsto get the troops out of Iraq?
Don’t get me wrong, I too love charismatic politicians and want the troops out of Iraq, but if these are the primary reasons that people are forming candidate allegiances, then why don’t we elect Leonardo DiCaprio as president? Obviously, it’s not that simple, and I don’t mean to say that everybody is completely lured in by the appeal to emotional sensibilities. But while I do believe, and hope, that more than a negligible minority of voters will look at the facts of candidates’ health care or national security plans rather than just being charmed by an energetic and sincere-sounding speech, we all know there are plenty of people who won’t vote for Hillary Clinton because, frankly, she seems like a bitch.
This is the root of our gravest political errors: We let our personal sentiments get in the way of thinking clearly and critically and in the process, lose sight of crucial facts.
Take for example, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, arguably one of the most elusive and seemingly unsolvable conflicts not only for this generation but for all generations to come. This is an issue for which ignorance and closed-mindedness play a frighteningly key role.
One of the problems with the way this conflict is addressed in the United States is that divisive opinions are imposed before they are independently formed. It took me a long time to shake off the claim, coming from certain Jewish communities, that questioning both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict makes one a “self-hating Jew,” as well as the assumption of a uniformity of opinion within the Jewish community with the constant mention of “standing by Israel,” often viewed as a necessary component for maintaining Jewish identity. I am not making any claims regarding the rights and wrongs of the conflict, or any other, but to say that a presupposed framework of uniformity of beliefs serves only as a barrier to understanding and healthy discourse.
Obviously, it is no surprise that any organization with an agenda will promote that agenda in any way possible, often without regard for factual information. And that is precisely why it is imperative not to allow ourselves to be indoctrinated by an ideology before carefully analyzing the notions it presents. Letting this happen is equivalent to letting ourselves become brainwashed.
The ease with which we fall into a pattern of thought can be scary, as we are bombarded with opinions from every possible outlet — be it home, school, the paper and so on — which is why it is so important to take what we hear and filter it with actual fact.
As much as what I’m saying seems painfully obvious, we must learn to make the distinction between opinions that are formed based on personal inclinations and then researched to support the presupposed one-sided belief, and views that crystallize after research and analysis. Once an opinion is instilled, it’s a lot easier to tailor the search for evidence such that it supports an already held belief. And that’s where the real danger lies, as those with one-dimensional knowledge will continue to inculcate their views in others, resulting in the cycle of miscommunication that plagues national and international relations.
Political organizer and author Saul Alinsky once said that he would never “accept a rigid dogma or ideology” for fear of being consumed by a single mode of thought and action. It is this notion that represents any hope we have for achieving political unity on any level because whatever preconceived notions we have must be discarded, at least temporarily, in favor of the critical analysis that is necessary, now more than ever, for understanding the current state of our world.
Hannah Shtein (shtein@wisc.edu) is a sophomore majoring in philosophy and religious studies.
Anonymous (October 23, 2007 @ 7:21am):
I voted for the guy I'd like to share a beer with in 2000 and 2004, and all I got was deficit spending, tax cuts for the ultra-wealthy, and prisoner torture.
Hannah, you CAN'T go into detail at rallies, you'd put your audience to sleep. If you want details, go to barackobama.com
Anonymous (October 23, 2007 @ 9:32am):
Hannah, when are you and your "progressive" ilk going to question Hamas and Hezbollah? They are terrorists. Never mind what Israel does. There will never be peace between Israel and the Palestinians until Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad et al, are removed. Enough about Israel!
Anonymous (October 23, 2007 @ 9:35am):
"that questioning both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict makes one a "self-hating Jew,"
No, questioning only the Israeli side makes you a self-hating Jew.
Anonymous (October 23, 2007 @ 10:05am):
Hannah, if critical analysis is necessary, then why don't you stop watching all those fake propaganda videos of "Israelis" committing "atrocities" against Palestinians and start looking at the BS the Palestinians are doing right now. They are creating an artificial shortage of food and medical supplies and blaming it all on Israel.
Grow a brain, kid! The Palestinians are not telling the whole story. Neither are the pro-Palestinian nutjobs who keep pumping all this anti-Israeli propaganda crap into your head!
Anonymous (October 23, 2007 @ 10:32am):
"which is why it is so important to take what we hear and filter it with actual fact."
Whose fact, yours? Hah! Go back to whatever Reconstructionist congregation you crawled out of, Hannah! I'm a real Jew, and real Jews support Israel.
Anonymous (October 23, 2007 @ 11:58am):
How is it not important to look at a president's personality? If we think Hillary Clinton is a bitch, what are other countries going to think? What will Iran or North Korea think? George Bush is a bitch, look where that got us.
Personality is important when choosing a president because it reflects the type of leadership they will bring to Washington. The type of leadership they bring affects the type of policies they put forth. You can't look at it in such black-and-white terms. Everything is connected.
Anonymous (October 23, 2007 @ 12:11pm):
Haba-shana B'Yerushalayim!
Anonymous (October 23, 2007 @ 12:17pm):
"Haba-shana B'Yerushalayim!"
Get this guy some grammar lessons!
Anonymous (October 23, 2007 @ 12:20pm):
"If we think Hillary Clinton is a bitch, what are other countries going to think?"
Margaret Thatcher? you 0, me 1
Anonymous (October 23, 2007 @ 1:02pm):
10:05 and 10:32...are you listening to yourselves? First, how can you criticize one entire Palestinian people for the actions of a few (especially when radical pro-Israelis do the same thing?)
And second, there are few things more offensive than phrases such as, "I'm a real (blank), and real (blanks) do this..." In this case, you are clearly not a "real Jew," and have no authority to say what others should and shouldn't think.
And to Hannah, I understand your point but agree with 7:21, in that this is was a rally, not intended to be an in-depth discussion of Obama's positions.
Anonymous (October 23, 2007 @ 2:06pm):
You need to go to more political rallies.
They are not supposed to be intellectually stimulating events.
They are supposed to rally the mob around the candidate through use of all the cliche platitudes.
Anonymous (October 23, 2007 @ 4:20pm):
maybe if you could read you would see that the point is not that the rally is not informational, it's that it's being treated by people as if it is. but surprise, surprise, everyone's as eager as ever to use every opportunity they can to talk out of their asses.
and rock on, "real jew" for being such a great poster child for the jewish community; way to not seem racist or judgmental.
Anonymous (October 23, 2007 @ 5:28pm):
saul alinsky, eh? sounds like something straight outta hillary's senior thesis. your motive is revealed-not that there's anything wrong with that, i like her too.
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
