"The Other Side of the Political Spectrum"

Often we hear about a dichotomy of opinions in society and how one side disagrees with the "other." However, I only seem to hear that the other side is just plain wrong instead of hearing what they think and why they think it. Consequently, I (and many more) form negative opinions and misconceptions about the other, which put up barriers, disallowing any real dialog or collaborative efforts that could result in productivity, understanding, encouragement, and peace.

In the spirit of bipartisanship, I chose to interview two conservative Republican students, Richey Kemmling and Elizabeth Dauenhauer. Both students hold staunch opinions, and both consider themselves conservative Republicans. Kemmling is notable for being the President of the College Republicans at the University of Washington, author of the contested UW Senate Resolution in support of the U.S. government's actions against terrorism, and a regular contributor to The Daily's opinion page. Dauenhauer holds the Public Relations Chairman position within the College Republicans, in addition to being, in my opinion, a strong, outspoken woman.

I met with each student individually for roughly an hour and discussed why each became involved with the Republican Party, what are their political ideologies, why they hold their political ideologies, and what each has done in support of their political dispositions. The students also gave overviews of the Republican Party's philosophies and gave justifications for theirs and the party's support of some platform issues. Before each interview, I browsed over the UW College Republican's webpage, noting the their Platform page, containing numerous platform issues.

My freshman year here at UW, I asked my friend "Liz" Dauenhauer if Bill Clinton was a Democrat or a Republican, and what was the difference anyway? Since that time, which I refer to as my political awakening, I've taken a political science course, kept up with current issues, and watched C-span and CNN regularly. Additionally, I've focused academically on social issues, which introduce problems that mostly liberals seem to care about and construct solutions to. As a result, I've found I stand on the left, and the majority of my conservative impressions came from contexts highlighting the ineffectiveness in Republican social policy, or the lack thereof. The College Republicans are one of the largest student groups here on campus, which boggled my mind. I could not imagine why so many people would subscribe to a party with such seemingly immoral and ineffective policies? My intention in researching and writing this assignment, therefore, was to expand my mind, resolve misconceptions, and uncover exactly what Republicanism is all about.

On the road to understanding Republicanism, both interviewees informally introduced me to Republican basics. Conservatism holds two schools of thought-fiscal and social. Republicans can be either or both. Within the fiscally conservative school of thought lies the promotion of small business and less government interference, as the government often inhibits the small business's ability to succeed. As for social conservatism, the Republican Party believes private entities, not the government, should create and implement programs geared towards social well-being. On the whole, Republicans stand for small government and evaluate policies on the macro, rather than micro level, meaning they look at the big picture more and individuals less.

Learning the basics of Republicanism was a good place to start, however I understood the party best when discussing specific issues with Kemmling and Dauenhaur. Through examination of several platform issues, I realized Republicans concern themselves very much with social structures. Specifically, the UW College Republicans Platform promotes traditional families, meaning two-parent households of man and woman in which the woman assumes the traditional role of homemaker. Moreover, the College Republicans believe the state should not give married people or single people different benefits. And, CR's feel adoption should only to be granted to married couples. Also related to social issues, Republicans advocate for the abolition of welfare, believing welfare breeds poverty, and the state should not assume the helping-hand role, but that private groups are more appropriate to offer help. College Republicans are also concerned with education, and specifically promote "the abolition of partisan higher education department such as Women's Studies," (Platform List, 1). Moreover, Republicans feel education as a whole is wrongfully slanted towards the left, and some programs, such as Women's Studies, are especially slanted and innately bad because they focus only on one group, which proceeds to divide society.

Environmental issues, in addition to social issues, act as a forum for Republicans to distinguish themselves politically. College Republicans at UW officially call for "responsible environmental regulation that does not infringe on the rights of an individual or property owner," (Platform List, 2). In speaking with Kemmling, I grasped this ambiguous statement with the debatable situation: if the spotted owl faces extinction, and saving that owl results in a logging father losing his job, a Republican, specifically Kemmling, would opt to save the employment. The articulated insignificance of the owl, representative of the environment at large, highlights, in my opinion, a large flaw, misallocation of values, and irresponsibility in the Republican Party's position on the environment. Whereas with previous social or economic issues, the Republican platform can be argued for and justified on some means, I have absolutely no tolerance for the hasty, abrupt and thoughtless response to such a critical environmental issues such as species extinction.

To review, Republicans advocate for small government, meaning the government possesses less of a presence and influence in peoples' lives. Also, Republicans encourage and promote the traditional family structure of a husband with a homemaker-wife, the proliferation of a religious presence in society (specifically schools), and the illegalization of abortions. Futhermore, I've observed a strong push for traditional (outdated, in my opionion) values. To paraphrase, Republicans want less governmental control and influence except when the control advances their interests. This element of hypocrisy, though condemnable, is nothing out of the ordinary for politics. I believe politics, as with all man-made constructions, reflect human nature, both the good and the bad. Nonetheless, my objective in researching and writing this paper was not to point out faults in conservative, Republican ideologies, but to understand my "other" and expunge any misconceptions and false judgments. What I've found is that Republicans are generally working towards a better, ideal America, similar to what I would conceive as ideal. However, I've affirmed more of my misconceptions rather than removing them in the sense that Republican policies, in general, wrongly percieve the needs and problems of society and the reasons why such needs exist. The policies and backing philosophies undervalue the environment, ignore societal disparities such as race and gender, and overlook causes of problems while seeking solutions.
Overall, I feel I've achieved my objective in this assignment. I understand my other more than I did before. While I'm certainly not an expert on Republicanism now, I took a step in the right direction-towards knowledge awareness, and acceptance.