It’s an interesting, terrifying, infuriating, exhilarating, exasperating proposition, that thing known as politics. It’s a game, it’s a civic struggle and, ultimately, extraordinarily essential to civilized life.
My first tussle with it began with the presidential election of 2000. My default position starting out was Conservatism. I don’t think I even really knew what it really was, just that many years of Limbaugh-indoctrination had me ponder George W. Bush, thinking that he was something of the presumed greatness of Ronald Reagan. That was one roller-coaster of an election, culminating in a series of recounts and arguments over “hanging chads” on paper ballots.
Over the years, decades now, my positions evolved. I’ve found over that time that I am, largely, very libertarian in nature. The place in which I am most authoritarian is in regards to pro-life issues. Having been born a Roman Catholic, it’s definitely been a thing. Abortion, euthanasia, the death penalty, unjust war–all of which are outlined in the Catechism as being very grave issues. My perception is that, of everything, life and death is absolutely nothing you fool with lightly–always side with life, especially for those who can’t speak for themselves.
Outside of this, my social positions are generally very much gender-, race-, creed-, orientation-neutral. Be who you are and, as long as it doesn’t actively get in the way of anyone else’s lives, you’re good to go. My solutions tend towards the notion of being unitive, which isn’t necessarily a popular thing when you live in a world of duality, ego, hubris and sensationalism. Peace and balance doesn’t sell. Righties and Lefties alike seem to think I’m quite odd, for this.
Economically, I’m generally capitalist–with limits. I’m all for light controls on the economy, to ensure that there remains competition in the market, and also that government doesn’t become too large a hindrance. I also think that capitalism run amok might yield a world much like the Orwellian 1984, where a revolution births a totalitarian movement. In a world where earnings are exponential, where even the “richest” 2% live paycheck-to-paycheck, that’s indicative of potential problems down the road–a clarion call to what might end up being the same “revolutions” we’ve seen in Cuba, Russia and other socialist nations. If there’s one thing that tantalizes the have-nots, it’s the promise of having. The less they have, the more that they’ll be drawn to that promise.
My positions have evolved to the basic notion of this: in a world of duality, where both sides have to be right to the detriment of the other, formulate and drive for solutions outside of what the duality fashions–something unitive. You’ll look like a weirdo to both sides, and that’s not necessarily a bad thing.