HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
 By Jack Lepiarz May 13, 2006 A couple weeks ago, I sat down for the showing of a documentary on the Vietnam War--one that my AP U.S. History class had been working on for the past year. I personally conducted many of the interviews for the documentary. I interviewed veterans who had been stationed in Vietnam during the bloodiest years of the war, and I interviewed anti-war protesters who broke down in tears during the interview. I spoke with people of all sorts of personal and political backgrounds, from liberal to conservative, from the most staunchly anti-war to some of the strongest supporters of the Vietnam war that I have ever met. After the documentary finished, my classmates and I, along with our teacher, sat up at the front of the room and took questions regarding the film. About halfway through, an old man in the back stood up and asked us if we thought that war was inevitable, and that conflict was simply a part of human nature. I took my time gathering my thoughts, and here's what I said: "I don't want to say that it's inevitable." I told him. "Because I don't want people to give up on trying to avoid conflict. We should always remember that conflict should be a last resort--when everything else has failed. I mean, when I think that people consider that war is inevitable, they won't try to avoid it, and I want to avoid unnecessary war as much as possible." That pretty much sums up my beliefs: A sort of cynical idealism (which I've gone into before, but I'll explain again). A belief that one should prepare for the worst, but still hope for the best. Some people disregard the liberal platform, saying that it is out of touch, and too idealistic, that it does not work in the real world. Conservatives can make a very good argument for many of their policies. Those that are against welfare have good reason to think so, if they think that all people on the street are there because they're lazy. And it's very true that many liberal policies are taken too far. Just look at Communism, which is extremely left-wing and cannot rightly be called liberal. Radical would be a much better word. Liberalism has caused problems in the past. Conservatism has caused problems in the past. Joseph McCarthy's witch-hunts are just one example of conservatives going too far. Lyndon Johnson's "Great Society" is an example of liberalism going too far. One should always look at an approach realistically, but also look at it idealistically. Like I said in my response to that man's question, I don't believe that people should give up on their ideals just because it may seem hard, or problems may seem inevitable. Some people want to give up on welfare because some people take advantage of it. What about the hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people, who honestly need it? Unemployment checks? One need only talk to anyone who has ever been laid off from a job to understand how difficult it might have been for them to get another job in that field. Sure, anyone can get a job working at a local convenience store, that's not difficult. But if someone working in an office setting gets laid off, there's that possibility that they might have to look around for a few months before they get a new job with a new company. Idealism meets realism. And then there are those that are working at two jobs--perhaps at a convenience store, and cannot make ends-meet. What do they do then? Work harder? Of course, their laziness is why they are so poor, and this is just Social Darwinism popping up. Or maybe they made a bad decision when they were a teenager, perhaps they became pregnant early. Should that one bad decision condemn them to a lifetime barely (if even) making enough money to support themselves and their children? Should we leave their children out to starve? This is where welfare comes into play. If you want to see lazy, take a drive around my town, where kids drive gigantic SUV's and have their parents pay for their gas. Where the kids refuse to do an ounce of homework simply because they don't want to. Is liberalism to blame for this? Or are their incredibly rich, conservative parents to blame for this? Isn't it strange that the laziest, lyingest, most immoral bunch of folks that I have ever met in my life, have all come from upper-class conservative homes? Now, I'm not trying to insinuate that conservatism is evil. I do not subscribe to that belief. However, liberalism is not the plague of society, as some, like Ann Coulter, would have you believe. Much of it comes from the home, and the type of upbringing you received from your parents--liberal or conservative. I've met liberals who were just as selfish and self-centered as the conservatives I just mentioned. However, like I said, one cannot simply disregard a lofty, idealistic belief simply because it seems difficult to achieve, or that some people may take advantage of you in the process. Just think of all those that will benefit from your help. By the way, after my response at the interview, a person came up to me and asked me when I was running for political office. I told him, no thanks. I like my ethics where I can see them. ------------ About the author: Jack Lepiarz is a senior at Madison High School. Born in Waco, Texas, he lived with the Big Apple Circus for much of his early childhood, eventually moving to Madison, New Jersey, where he now resides. Although he is often described as stubborn and egotistical, he tries to keep an open-mind towards new ideas and treat people the way he would like to be treated. Email: Jackwuzhere42@aol.com Comment on this article here! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com and are not allowed to be posted on other websites. ARTICLE THIEVES WILL BE PROSECUTED! |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
