vote-1319435_640

Recently I read this news story on Reuters: U.S. Supreme Court rejects Michigan straight-ticket voting appeal. Straight-ticket voting is having the option on the top of the ticket to vote for all candidates from one party instead of casting an individual vote for each office on the ticket. A Judge suspended the law pending litigation and the state tried to appeal this injunction to both the appeals court and the supreme court and both rejected it. Opponents of the law claim that the law aims to reduce minorities turn out which hurt the democratic party.

This story is one of many recent stories about voting rights where a certain measure aiming to regulate voting is rejected or blocked by courts because it may reduce the minorities turn out.
These stories show how little these people who claim to defend minorities actually think of minorities. If you believe what these people claim about minorities you will think that minority people are victims who cannot obtain driver licenses, cannot read the ballot and make decisions about candidates and cannot show up on election day to vote so we need to let them vote from home and give them weeks in advance to cast their ballots.

Racism in the United States started as an excuse for slavery. Slavery proponents who wanted to make slavery look legitimate created a lot of literature to say black people are inferior to whites and cannot live independently without a white master to take care of them and explained slavery based on that as an institution to help black people. Unfortunately, the modern black and minorities defendants use the same logic of slavery proponents to explain their policies that aim to make minorities dependent on the government. It is sad to see a majority of the black population in the United States fall victims to these racist ideas that aim to keep them as loyal subjects of the Democratic party machine, the same party that supported slavery, created Jim Crew laws and instituted segregation.

Many white people as well believe that they have a moral obligation to support these racist ideas as a payback for the sin of slavery. But it’s important to realize that slavery didn’t start with blacks. European used to enslave other Europeans, Asians used to take other Asians as slaves and Africans used to take other Africans as slaves. The Europeans taking Africans as slaves is a late development of the 17th and 18th century and African slaves were sold to Europeans by African and Arab slave traders in exchange for European goods such as Guns. People who were slaves and people who enslaved them died generations ago so no one living now is directly affected by slavery. Many immigrants from the Carribean, latin America, and Asia arrived in the United States in the twentieth century with little education and skills and major language barrier but succeeded over a couple of generations to achieve high social and economic status without help from anyone.

Enacting discriminatory policies such as affirmative action and racial quotas is not needed. These policies usually have reverse effect because people will view the success of any minority person as an outcome of such policies instead of merit based success. These policies only serve the needs of opportunist politicians who want to keep the minority population as loyal subjects and guaranteed votes.

More Resources:

One of the main political myths of modern politics is that the United States should intervene militarily in foreign nations to achieve some high moral goal such as stopping communism, spreading democracy or defending human rights. In spite of the record of failure of this policy, it still persists and many people still repeat the same argument that the world is a dangerous place and intervening makes it less so. Proponents of military intervention always defend the failures of the Vietnam and Iraq wars by citing certain failures in execution but in reality, the whole idea is fundamentally flawed.

The main problem that these people ignore is that war is a destructive activity. It takes resources from the economy and destroys them. So the soldiers who fight in the war are taken from the pool of capable workers and the materials used in producing weapons and ammunitions are taken from the private economy placing stress on the available resources. People who may support a war because they like its public goal will quickly rethink their opinion when they see the coffins of dead soldiers coming back home and the broken of these fallen soldiers, when they see the wounded warriors coming back with life-changing disabilities and when they see taxes or deficits increase to pay for the war. When war extends in time and casualties continue to mount the political pressure will mount to end the war. It is hard for democratic governments to sustain long wars that don’t have a strong cause supported by the majority of the population. The only reason that guarantees sustained support is if the war was defensive.

If we examined the example of the Iraq war, many people liked the idea of removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq but not many people continued to like the war when they saw the thousands of dead and wounded and the billions wasted on that war. The same could be said about Korea and Vietnam wars where both lost political support pretty quickly amid mounting human and economic cost. Our foes in these examples fought hard enough to make the war long and costly.

These wars were all failures not only because of the huge human and economic loss but also because the political goal was unnecessary. North Korea and China remained communist countries after the Korean war and Vietnam became a unified communist country after the Vietnam war but that didn’t make communism any stronger and the whole idea was naturally defeated by the weight of its deficiencies, so was it necessary to sacrifice all these lives? The middle east was unstable before the Iraq war and it became even more unstable after the Iraq war under fresh generation of dictators and demagogues.

The only real way to really cause positive change in the world is by being a positive example for other nations. If we abandoned the dreams of nation building and world fixing and focused instead on strengthening our liberties and remove the artificial barriers to our economic growth we will be in a better position to defend against any foe who attacks us. We should only go to war to defend a clear national goal such as our citizens, land or trade routes and when we go to war we should focus on achieving that national goal not on shaping others in an image we like.