Personal Agenda Creates Political Standpoints
An infamous lyric in national anthem of the United States of America by Francis Scott Key, “The Star-Spangled Banner” goes, “O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.” As an American citizen, it is a privilege as well as a responsibility to contribute to the political aspect of the nation because everyone is granted freedom. As one is allowed freedom, making decisions are part of the duty of an American. Decisions we make everyday are based on our own values and ideas, so it will come as no surprise that many people’s political views are influenced by one’s personal opinion as well. However, is a person in the right to base their political stance on personal ideas? In a nation such as …show more content…
Emmeline Pankhurst is a prime example of making change happen after expressing her feelings towards equality, which changed the course of history for women. In Pankhurst’s Freedom or Death speech she says, “We women, in trying to make our case clear, always have to make as part of our argument, and urge upon men in our audience the fact - a very simple fact - that women are human beings. (Pankhurst 3)” Pankhurst had a powerful message to share and she stood up for what she believed, which inspired change for the betterment of society. A thought is merely a concept, but when it is voiced for others to understand it can transform into much more. As an American citizen, freedom of speech is granted, therefore being able to make an impact on an issue is plausible. However, not every alteration may benefit society and not everyone will agree to a change. Just less than a month ago there was a white nationalist group who had protested in Charlottesville, Virginia about the removal of the Confederate General Robert E. Lee. These individuals of white descent believe that they are superior over other racial backgrounds. Today, there are different names for these white supremacist groups such as neo-Nazis or the Alt-Right. However, according to CNN, “But the goal is the same: a white ethno-state where each race lives in a separate nation. White supremacists and their ilk see diversity as a …show more content…
With a society like the one that America is today, there are no two people exactly the same, and no two ideas exactly the same, creating people to have to make decisions for themselves. As such, there everyone has certain values which is sought for in the president because although facts can prove whether or not one president is better than another it is not one-hundred percent accurate, so where the facts lack, it is up to the person’s values to make a choice. In Steven J. Jurek’s and Anthony Scime’s research, it specifies on what type of person is more likely to lead a free state and in it it says gender is not found significant. It goes on to say, “Gender is also not found significant; however, males occupy 92 percent of the executive positions so they overshadow the analysis. (Jurek and Scime 108)” As this research shows, even data can not be entirely accurate, so it is up to the person to make the final decision because personal beliefs is a more prominent factor in matters such as these. One might argue that facts are exactly what one must rely on making a momentous decisions such as this. The same article as above it states, “When the years in office are less than 5 years, then religion makes a difference. A state is more likely to be a free state is the executive is Roman Catholic. (Jurek and Scime 108)” It shows what to look at in a candidate to make the state more likely to be a free state
An infamous lyric in national anthem of the United States of America by Francis Scott Key, “The Star-Spangled Banner” goes, “O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.” As an American citizen, it is a privilege as well as a responsibility to contribute to the political aspect of the nation because everyone is granted freedom. As one is allowed freedom, making decisions are part of the duty of an American. Decisions we make everyday are based on our own values and ideas, so it will come as no surprise that many people’s political views are influenced by one’s personal opinion as well. However, is a person in the right to base their political stance on personal ideas? In a nation such as …show more content…
Emmeline Pankhurst is a prime example of making change happen after expressing her feelings towards equality, which changed the course of history for women. In Pankhurst’s Freedom or Death speech she says, “We women, in trying to make our case clear, always have to make as part of our argument, and urge upon men in our audience the fact - a very simple fact - that women are human beings. (Pankhurst 3)” Pankhurst had a powerful message to share and she stood up for what she believed, which inspired change for the betterment of society. A thought is merely a concept, but when it is voiced for others to understand it can transform into much more. As an American citizen, freedom of speech is granted, therefore being able to make an impact on an issue is plausible. However, not every alteration may benefit society and not everyone will agree to a change. Just less than a month ago there was a white nationalist group who had protested in Charlottesville, Virginia about the removal of the Confederate General Robert E. Lee. These individuals of white descent believe that they are superior over other racial backgrounds. Today, there are different names for these white supremacist groups such as neo-Nazis or the Alt-Right. However, according to CNN, “But the goal is the same: a white ethno-state where each race lives in a separate nation. White supremacists and their ilk see diversity as a …show more content…
With a society like the one that America is today, there are no two people exactly the same, and no two ideas exactly the same, creating people to have to make decisions for themselves. As such, there everyone has certain values which is sought for in the president because although facts can prove whether or not one president is better than another it is not one-hundred percent accurate, so where the facts lack, it is up to the person’s values to make a choice. In Steven J. Jurek’s and Anthony Scime’s research, it specifies on what type of person is more likely to lead a free state and in it it says gender is not found significant. It goes on to say, “Gender is also not found significant; however, males occupy 92 percent of the executive positions so they overshadow the analysis. (Jurek and Scime 108)” As this research shows, even data can not be entirely accurate, so it is up to the person to make the final decision because personal beliefs is a more prominent factor in matters such as these. One might argue that facts are exactly what one must rely on making a momentous decisions such as this. The same article as above it states, “When the years in office are less than 5 years, then religion makes a difference. A state is more likely to be a free state is the executive is Roman Catholic. (Jurek and Scime 108)” It shows what to look at in a candidate to make the state more likely to be a free state