This past week, Keshav Poddar '14 discussed the crucial issue of the American voter lacking basic knowledge of civics as they entered the polls ("Uninformed Voter," Nov. 7). I could not agree more that a significant number of voters are uninformed, but I propose that the problem extends to a larger cultural issue prevalent throughout our nation. The particular uniformed friend that Poddar mentions has made essential headway in her self-education in U.S. politics she has identified the issue of her own unawareness, and can proceed from there. But many people are not so brave to question and investigate the accuracy of their own knowledge.
I was recently asked to participate in a survey. One of the questions asked me to assign a numeric value to my political beliefs, on a scale from liberal to conservative. "Isn't this a little one-dimensional?" I asked the student.
This was by no means my introduction to the prevalence of this pigeonholing, but I contend that this "us vs. them" mentality contributes significantly to the widespread ignorance of our voting population.
The perceived dichotomy of liberal and conservative allows us to be satisfied by assigning ourselves to a particular corner of the ring without necessarily understanding why. This might explain why the studies Poddar cites came to the conclusions that they did the college-educated respondents may have never felt the need to understand their Constitution. So long as they were able to define their political feelings with a convenient label, they were able to justify their positions and voting trends.
Such one-dimensionality has manifested itself into a dangerous culture of thinking. On a recent visit home, one of my friends was shocked that I would dare to oppose President Barack Obama's position on legalizing marijuana. "So who would you have voted for, McCain?" she asked angrily.
This was beside the point both candidates would have continued the current prohibition, and there were a number of other candidates in the political arena with varied stances on the issue. What this college graduate was exuding was an unwillingness for others to place themselves outside of what is actually a false dichotomy and a lack of acceptance of unique solutions that may not always present themselves as "liberal" or "conservative."
While Poddar's idea to implement civics education nationwide is well-intended, it's important to note that many high schools already have comparable requirements. Whether or not we retained the information is directly impacted by our understanding of our own beliefs, and whether or not we can logically justify them.
It's easy to buy into the same ideologies of those around us. Looking past simple headline labels such as "health care," "lower taxes" and "drug control" is imperative to our ability to thoughtfully elect representatives and hold them to their promises. Political candidates consistently try to assign themselves to the liberal-conservative paradigm to win over a voting population but it's paramount for us to notice that their platform may not be consistent with either of these labels.
Our ability to see beyond the supposed liberal-conservative dichotomy is crucial to our everyday lives. The various anti-narcotic raids and felony charges that Dartmouth's Greek houses have faced over the past few decades are directly related to federal law which, in turn, falls upon our voting trends and understanding of politics beyond generic labels.
I do not believe that voters like Poddar's friend are the problem she dared to question her own knowledge of the system, and I believe that she will find her own answers. But many voters suffer from a false sense of security in their civics knowledge and have satisfied themselves with buying into an inexact paradigm. All citizens from the freshman voter to hopefuls running for office can benefit from questioning what they truly know about our system.
