Andrew Nenow is a wine and viticulture sophomore and Mustang Daily conservative columnist.
The majority of the articles that come out of this column come from current political issues and pertain to those that most well-informed Americans are aware of.
This week, I chose to talk about an issue that has been on my mind ever since I was a kid. This issue, which became apparent to me through watching the news, seeing countless debates and elections and even through watching my family, is what I feel is one of the greatest threats to America.
With a two-party system, politics in the United States are constantly in a battle between the two sides. There are the occasional smaller parties somewhere in the middle or to an extreme left or right, but an overwhelming majority associate as Republican or Democrat. It has been the same since the Federalists and Democratic-Republicans opposed each other in the early history of this nation.
The sad truth about today’s society is that some people take their politics, opinions and political affiliations too seriously. This is a truth that I could never prove to you with statistics, but it is something I have struggled to deal with my entire politically-enlightened life.
Obviously you should not allow yourself to be passive with your beliefs, but it has gotten to the point that people tend to put their political ideals in front of more important aspects of life. I have experienced this fact first hand.
I have one of the most loving and tight-knit families a person could have, and I am very grateful for that. I have more than 20 cousins, and family gatherings of 50 or more people are quite common. We enjoy laughs and are always excited to see each other.
In the midst of this great family love lies a sort of tension that became apparent as I grew up. My family is split down the middle in political ideals; one side is Conservative, while the other is Liberal.
As a result, a lot of trash talking occurs on each side. Some of which comes to a forefront at family gatherings.
The point is that even my family experiences a divide due to a difference of opinion.
This same divide appears to be forming in the fabric of American society. I have seen people express hateful feelings toward others and myself because they simply see the world differently.
To this American, here lies the problem: It appears that people are forgetting the meaning of an opinion and letting their egos get in the way of reality. It’s called an opinion for a reason.
The reality of the universe is that no one is ever going to completely agree on how the world came to be or on whether or not atoms can be broken down any further. This is because there is no way of absolutely determining the answer to these questions, and this can be said about many of the political issues people argue about on a daily basis.
The German philosopher Immanuel Kant called these undeterminable battles antinomies. He and I both believe these antinomies are meant to prove the limits we have as human beings. They are meant to show us there are certain truths that will always have two sides. Two sides, that although completely contradict each other, stand to reason.
This is where we get our opinions. We get them from the fact that we simply see the world in a different way and understand reality from a different aspect.
So why is there so much hate surrounding politics just for believing in something? Are our egos so large that we can’t even let someone believe something beyond what we believe?
As new political issues arise and new discoveries are made, this riff in society will only widen. It is important that people begin to respect the opinions of others and not take it so personally when someone disagrees with you. It’s time to stop putting ourselves under the elephant or donkey banner and come together under the red, white and blue.
The article’s message is good, but Kantian philosophy is somewhat misapplied. Kant’s ideas about the limitations of human reason, illustrated most poignantly in his antinomies, pertains to reality and metaphysics. I could argue that politics mainly concerns two disciplines: science and ethics. When it comes to ethics, Kant is certainly not one to compromise. As for science, many political issues and debates involve ideas that lie within human experience. For example, Kant probably wouldn’t agree that the problems and proposed solutions involving healthcare cannot be empirically verified in some way. Once again, although the article sends a good message, it is not necessarily well supported by Kantian metaphysics.
You are right, Kant never applied his antinomies to opinions or politics or how the two interrelate. That being said, I personally see a connection between the antinomies and how people formulate opinions. It can be said that to each opinion there are two sides. Two sides, that although contradict each other, both stand to reason. It is in that respect that I see a connection between Kantian philosophy and the subject of my article. But you are absolutely right, Kant probably would not have agreed with me.
Andrew-
I think you may have enrolled in the wrong philosophy class … perhaps you could squeeze in on on logic next time. Quoting Kant (who wouldn’t agree with you, by your own admission) as an appeal to authority weakens your argument.
I do sympathize with your family predicament, since I am a liberal and have family members who are conservatives. I certainly do not hate them, nor do I deny them the right to their own opinions. What frustrates me about them, and you, is a sense of entitlement to their own facts, or at least a willingness to accept as fact anything that coincides with a preconceived world view without verification.
We all want a strong, safe and prosperous Republic … or at least most of the people I know do. We may have differences about the best means of bringing that about, but I think you are mistaken in thinking that those differences are greater than the beliefs we hold in common … even if giving your opinion about a matter of universal agreement would make for a sorry column.
I hope your column returns in the fall. Winemaking isn’t the only thing you can “learn by doing”, after all. Reading your column has raised my blood pressure, and forced me to investigate things like the Westlands Water District and that flawed Spanish study on green energy jobs that I was woefully ignorant of before you alluded to them. I would appreciate it if you didn’t make me work so hard next year, and identify your sources of fact (if you say “Congress did something”, identify the law in question, for example).
I do wish that you would lose the flag picture and the “this American” phrasing … it makes you sound pretentious, and infers that your point of view is more essentially “American” than those who disagree, which is insulting. I would also take “myriad” and “plethora” and bury them in a deep hole in the back yard.
Best wishes to you.
I am sorry if my column is not up to you’re standards. And don’t worry, I am aware that I am not the best writer. Its the content that I am passionate about. I do appreciate you’re critiques and will keep them in mind in future columns. As for you not thinking that the political gap in America is real: I understand that not everyone is like that (because obviously you’re like me and don’t hate others for their opinions), but I have experienced this first hand. For example, one person saying they would punch me in the face if they ever come across me. These people don’t scare me. However, I just can’t stand the hate and disrespect over politics that is present these days. Although you and I don’t have this quality, there are many many many people out there that do.
Your and You’re are different words. Please try not to confuse them. Your use of “its” in the second sentence is also incorrect, it should be “it’s.”
Stating that content is more important than presentation is a noble way to go about things, but its hard to take someone seriously when they make simple mistakes in spelling and grammar. If you aren’t willing to improve your english skills you should find somebody willing to proofread your work for spelling and grammatical mistakes so that those of us who are already predisposed to disagree with you don’t have to question your competency.
TL;DR: Get an editor.
*ahem*
Insert foot into mouth. I dropped an apostrophe on it’s in that comment.
Andrew, your writing has improved, but as “M” mentions there is still need for some improvement. This newspaper has an editor, so why aren’t your articles edited for grammar and spelling by the editor?
You can critique my writing as much as you want and it won’t make a difference to me. As I ALREADY said, I am aware that I’m not the greatest writer, and I will work to improve my writing skills. However, the important thing about this column is the content, which I am very passionate about. So you can point out my writing mistakes (even in my comments apparently) and I”ll continue to not care.