Skip to main content

Change, Irony, Comparisons, and Alleged Hypocrisy

It's very commonplace for liberals or progressives to desire change, to want the country to "progress" and move forward on a number of issues. It's one reason why I believe self-described liberals to be less consistent making it to the polls on election day, because if we don't see the progress we had anticipated or been told to expect, we'll often times feel less motivation to vote the next election cycle. Conservatives, meanwhile, as the term would suggest, tend to want things to stay as they are, for things not to change too drastically. Because drastic changes aren't very common, they tend to be regularly more content come election day than progressives, which may be one factor why Republican candidates have a tendency to outperform Democratic candidates in the midterms.

Going along those same lines, conservatives tend to claim that they love this country as it is or "as it was" and will even go so far as to criticize progressives for seeking change, because, as they so often eloquently state, "If you don't love this country, get out!" I've even heard some resort to the line, "If you think things are bad here, just look at what's going on in Africa! Come on, get a little perspective here!" I've also heard this attack from some conservatives: "Liberals are such hypocrites! They whine and complain about the treatment of women and gays in this country, but don't complain at all about how they're treated in other countries, like over in the Middle East!"

To the first point, change is inevitable. We can either learn to adapt or try to make it by while still being stuck in our ways. Just because many in this country seek to progress with regard to human rights, infrastructure, transportation, energy, technology, education, etc., doesn't mean we don't "love" this country; it simply means we want to improve it, both for ourselves and others. Just because a person seeks to make some changes in their life doesn't mean they don't love themselves; it simply means they've recognized their flaws or bad habits and want to improve upon them for a better future. While some may want to believe that this country is perfect, just like someone may want to believe they're perfect, that's simply denial talking, and the more one is in denial about this, the less likely they'll be to making the proper changes to improve their lives and with that, their futures, because how could one fix a problem they don't believe exists? So, as far as I see it, both liberals and conservatives love this country; they just envision a different ideal version of it, with progressives looking ahead and conservatives looking behind.

With regard to the second point, yes, that's true to an extent - things are much better here than in many countries, especially the underdeveloped ones, and perhaps women and homosexuals should be grateful they reside here as opposed to those less tolerant nations. However, do we really want to constantly compare ourselves to these very countries? Shouldn't we aspire to rise above such nations? I find it ironic that those who tend to consistently say, "The U.S. is the greatest country in the history of the world," would resort to comparing us with some lesser developed countries in order to illustrate that we're not "so bad" when it comes to equal rights for women, homosexuals, and the like. In my opinion, if one feels the need to resort to such comparisons abroad, chances are some improvements are needed at home.

Lastly, when it comes to the hypocrisy attack, again, conservatives do have a point to a certain extent, but once again, I find it ironic that a group which continually refers to this country as the greatest ever would resort to comparing us with lesser developed countries. Also, for as much as I and many others would like to save the world, we're much more limited in our impact abroad than we are at home. So while we may despise how women and homosexuals are treated in some countries overseas, we feel more helpless to those situations than we do here at home, where we feel our voice and our votes actually count for something. People of all stripes may have it better here than in many other countries, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't strive for better. After all, as many conservatives like to say, I thought we were the "best," so why don't we strive to match that high praise through our actions and not just our words?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...

Face guarding is legal in college football and the NFL

I just wanted to remind fans and announcers especially, that face guarding is legal in both college football and the NFL. It all comes down to contact. So long as a defender doesn't make contact with an intended receiver, he doesn't have to turn around to play the ball. I can't tell you how many times every week I hear announcers talk about face guarding being a penalty. It's not. I even heard one announcer yesterday state, "If the defender doesn't turn around and play the ball, the ref will call pass interference every time." That's simply not true. Courtesy of referee Bill LeMonnier, he says this with regard to the rule at the college level (answered on 8/12/13): "NCAA rules on pass interference require the face guarding to have contact to be a foul. No contact, no foul by NCAA rules." In the NFL rule book, this is written:  "Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Contact by a ...