It all started when I came across a clip from Fox News. They aired a segment where an anchor from New York was sent into the “progressive hellscape” of Seattle to speak with residents about the city’s alleged increase in crime rates.
The studio’s introduction to the clip laments residents who “mocked” Fox’s assertions about the city “spiraling out of control.” The casters at Fox weren’t stupid: Despite online commenters praising the seeming lampooning of a ridiculous narrative, Fox was winning. In weaponizing ideological buzzwords, Fox was able to frame the interviewees in dissent with their narrative as ignorant.
Suddenly, people who literally live in Seattle were deemed incapable of giving testimony regarding the state of crime in their own city, simply because they were labeled as Democrats. Both sides here could have shed some light on the complex issue of crime in de-policed cities like Seattle. But Democrats and Republicans both think the other is just plain stupid and therefore used the opportunity to wage an ideological “I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I” war instead.
In our hopelessly partisan world, the compulsive assignment of ideological labels to people, regions and social movements has completely destroyed the possibility for productive discourse, politically hobbling the country’s constituency to focus on the meat of American politics: real societal issues and policy solutions.
Democrats, supposedly on the side of speaking truth to power and justice, have been pitted against Republicans who purport to uphold traditional societal roles. Amidst this distraction, these solutions become further out of reach as wealth and power become increasingly concentrated amongst American elites and the average American becomes progressively disadvantaged.
There has never been a moment in American history when it has been more necessary to find common ground and unite for the sake of committing political action that promotes collective benefit.
We do not have time for partisan tit-for-tat when the very base of American democracy is threatened. Current discourse promotes an intense, draconian misconstruction of generally non-radical political goals, when regular people just want the world to be a better place. The solution? A non-ideological revolution, now.
I find the entire premise of the ideological spectrum problematic. The two-dimensional spectrum we base the entire country’s operations on is incompatible with effective discourse. Society is anything but two-dimensional. These labels dehumanize the people that use them, erasing human individuality and fluidity in favor of a rigid, recognizable agenda.
But, you may say, “Why, these labels don’t apply to me! I’m no dirty liberal, I actually identify as an anarcho-syndicalist!” This type of political identity specialization is exactly the problem — our passion for labels sows the seeds for an ever-developing “us versus them” society. The cultural atomization of the party line into the political spectrum is just a fun way of sowing division across and within party lines.
This factionalization results in a political groupthink phenomenon. People get far too caught up in what it means to be a good representative of their tribe, and ultimately advocate against themselves in terms of policy in the name of their ideology. Once you decide your position, your mind automatically acquires a distaste for dissenting reasoning, effectively making ideological subscription the least productive thing you could do as an ever-learning-and-changing being.
Under the current two-dimensional political format, people are not encouraged to consider alternatives beyond what their spectrum is offering them.
In fact, the design of the two-party system political spectrum rewards the radicalization of political candidates and fails to serve the needs of the general public. Primary elections have come to be dominated by increasingly ideological and partisan candidates because they gain greater traction among the activist-type voters who are more likely to participate in initial primary elections than the average voter.
Moderate candidates who might represent the majority of citizens are systematically discouraged from running for office. Resulting congressional legislatures produce mass dissatisfaction among voters, yet individual members see record-high reelection rates.
The current sociopolitical sphere has made so many missteps that it feels as though salvation in this realm is far gone. We must engage in a mass movement for the reformation of political thought.
Abandoning ideological labels would allow us to shed the predetermined judgments we have about other people based on how they identify. It might help us learn to recognize the fact that one person’s flourishing doesn’t oppress ours.
With that recognition, we need to find basic common values grounded in respect and equality for all. We have the power to rebuild moral law without devaluing other people’s wants, needs and perspectives. As the country’s population grows, we have to radically accept that no one strict moral code can be impressed upon the entire nation.
In our current predicament, I worry that we will never again hear soothing and unifying concessions being made between party lines, like we saw in the election of 1960, for example. Out of all the things we definitely should have left in the 1900s, the humane underbelly of politics should not have gone out of fashion. We must re-value the act of compromise.
Especially in the current political sphere, where a majority of polarization is based upon value-wars and each party fights to insert their personal values into legislation that governs all. I encourage you to stop yourself from aligning with platforms that aim to institutionally force their ideological ideals onto your fellow Americans.
As a nation, we must realize that there is no overarching “wicked issues” mandate that doesn’t oppress one group or another. Freedom for one set of values mandates freedom for all; otherwise we put discrimination into legal practice.
Rather, we need to focus on committing pragmatic political action, without advocating against others. If that means crossing party lines or forgoing your subscription to your favorite party’s manifesto, so be it. Before you vote or issue grievances to your representatives, make sure to ground yourself in the freedom-oriented principles of the First Amendment that have allowed us to flourish as a representative democratic nation thus far.
I truly believe that the first step towards recognizing a future in which we can hold the government accountable and start seeing a legislature that acts in accordance with the needs of the people is found in a mass renunciation of ideology.
Does it scare you, the idea of letting go of your ideological identity? It scared me. Feelings of reluctance to let go show that we have been conditioned to believe that these imaginary labels matter far too much. Imagine a political realm where people advocate under the guise of issues, not factions.
We are all living in this country with needs going unmet. We all want to see progress. We do not need to be enemies. “The revolution will not be televised,” it starts in your mind.
Shed your ideology, it’s paralyzing you.
Celeste Cariker PZ ’28 for President 2048.
Facebook Comments