after reading this
amusing but still somewhat sobering thread, i started to think again... about something that's been on my mind a lot, lately.
well, i'm in AP history 2, see... and not too long ago we were learning about post-revolution political thought. i'll make a quick synopsis. there were two main political parties
dividing the fledgling nation. one wanted to put more power in the executive branch (with actions like the patriot and alien acts), and the other half wanted the distribution of governmental power to be even throughout. it seemed america was halved, and the halves cast behind one party or the other.
now what i've been thinking about is this: in that era, party politics were seen as a dangerous idea for what should be obvious reasons today: the two factions would dominate the government mind, and nobody who wanted anything would get anything, because competition has such a large role when you add "teams".
thomas jefferson, whom you may or may not know (elowelzorz) took an admirable stance to the whole thing. when labeled as a republican (which is old-school for democrat
XD), he boldly replied that he aligned himself with no party completely, that his ideals and opinions were his own.
i know most of us like to think that we're that way.. but then, why call ourselfs conservatives? or liberals? or democrats, republicans, green party, nazi, whatever.
i don't do that. i call myself a "_____ supporter" depending on what the issue is. you can fill in the blank with pro choice, schwarzenegger, or whatever my stance may be.
but i never blanket my entire political theory with a single word. i remember that there's one kid on these boards who likes to say something along the lines of "[his name]-ism". that's the kinda thing that i like.
when you take the shortcut and call yourself a liberal, or a conservative, or whatever, aren't you silencing yourself and your opinions? where's the individuality?