We live in a highly partisan era; we do not believe in compromise. In debates, we either win or we lose. We fight to make our points heard and belittle and discredit the ideas offered by the opposing parties. When politicians make any form of change regarding their personal stances on any issue, it makes them look like they made false promises to their constituents. By signing a deal with “the enemy” makes them look like they conceded on the goals that matter to the public. We, as a society, do not believe that compromising is a sign of strength, we view it as a sign of weakness.

Our country was not always in a state of division. In every bill, in every court ruling, in every belief, Republicans were not always pitted against Democrats and vice versa. In fact, studies have shown that in the past, a moderate party did, in fact, exist. Democrats and Republicans were able to debate and create new policies. People were able to have a civilized conversation about serious issues without the other side screaming at them; they were allowed to present well-reasoned arguments with supporting evidence without the fear of persecution for their beliefs. Compromise is now an idea that is essentially dead in all but name. In recent polls, it has shown that there is no middle ground, that the two parties are unyielding in their beliefs. However, this begs the question, how did we get to this point; why are we so unwilling to admit that we are wrong?

Labels are a strong society’s kryptonite. Labeling something makes our life easy, it helps us comprehend what would otherwise be unimaginable. However, because we label, we also exclude. According to the Labeling Theory, when a society gives a person a label, regardless of whether it is true, the person will inevitably succumb to the label that society gives to them. This means that if society labels one person as a liberal, said person will be pressured into conforming to the ideas that are stereotypically for a liberal to believe in and practice. This theory alone is not enough to cause the partisan divide within America, there is another theory that causes this divide: the selective-exposure theory. This theory states that people will want to gravitate more towards the group that they identify. Therefore, once a person is labeled a liberal, then they will gravitate towards a more liberal friend group. According to this theory, people attempt to isolate themselves with people they identify with because it makes them comfortable. However, because people do not want to associate with people who they do not identify with, their experiences will also be limited. In recent studies, researchers have found that Republicans will go out of their way to avoid socializing with Democrats and vice versa. They will never understand life on the other side.

With neither side understanding where the other comes from, every political issue has become a battle. We fight for major issues such as military action and the federal budget to factually proven statements such as whether climate change is real or that fossil fuels are bad for the environment. We fight not because we are willing to die for our beliefs, but because our news tells us that in order to survive, we must fight for the beliefs they give us. However, these news stations are notorious for giving “half-truths;” feeding us information that is not a lie but not exactly the entire truth either. Additionally, these news stations are also notorious for praising the politicians that agree with what they want their message to be while also ridiculing politicians that do not conform to their base. With many American citizens only watching one news station, they are inevitably doomed to become rooted in one belief and unwilling to see the potential genius of any other idea.

We need to learn that there is no one right idea, belief, ideology; but there is one wrong one: the intolerance of opposing opinions.

Links:
https://www.thoughtco.com/labeling-theory-3026627
https://www.people-press.org/interactives/political-polarization-1994-2017/
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-identity-not-issues-explains-the-partisan-divide/
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/09/us/politics/fact-check-family-separation-obama.html

After the approximate month-long government shutdown, President Trump failed to receive the money that he desired and needed to fund his border wall. Both parties, while varying in their reasons, decided that the money that President Trump wanted to spend on the border wall could be better spent somewhere else, whether it be in our transportation systems, education, or military. With the end of the shutdown, we believed that the national crisis has ended – or so we thought.

On February 15, 2019, thirteen hours after he lost in Congress, President Trump decided to declare a “national emergency” at our southern border. As a country, we have determined that one of the president elect’s constitutional vested powers is that he or she has the power to declare a national emergency. According to Duhaime’s Law Dictionary, there are only two necessary requirements for a president to declare a national emergency: a situation arises that is beyond the ordinary which threatens the health and safety of citizens and that the use of other laws cannot adequately address it.

In his press statement in the Rose Garden, President Trump declared to the American Public that the flow of drugs and illegal immigrants coming into the country from Mexico has made it necessary to declare a national emergency. President Trump claims that these illegal immigrants are the monsters destroying our country, that they are the reason our country is in trouble and why he has to place our southern border under a national emergency.

However, like most of President Trump’s speeches, the facts surrounding his speech are hazy at best. According to USA Today, the FBI, CIA and other major intelligence offices have captured and questioned many of the high-ranking members of the Mexican Drug Cartel. From these interrogations, our government intelligence agencies have discovered that most of the drugs that are smuggled into our countries come from legal ports or entrances, not random border crossings. However, since President Trump has declared a national emergency, he can take the funds that were allocated to the military and spend them on his border wall claiming that it is a “military construction project not otherwise authorized by the law.” What this means is that President Trump can now go around Congress’s decision and build his wall.

Now Congress has the power to end a national emergency; but like every decision they make, Congress requires a two-thirds majority vote. However, according to the Washington Post, despite the overwhelming evidence that we do not need a border wall, not many Republicans will not stand against the President on this issue because they fear the backlash from his base. Therefore, it seems unlikely that Congress will act against the President’s actions in this matter.

President Trump’s declaration of a national emergency is, according to the New York Times, clearly a retaliation towards Congress’s decision to not fund the wall; thereby raising the question, should there be more requirements to declare a national crisis, or at least require another person, besides the President or Vice-President, to sign off on this executive decision. Luckily, since this is a government by the people, for the people, of the people, the people who are directly impacted have the power to challenge a national emergency in Congress.

This process may appear difficult; it may even seem impossible; however, because of the structure of our government, we the people have the power to challenge any decision made by the President. However, according to NBC News, there are several organizations, such as Public Citizens, Center for Biological Diversity, even sixteen states, challenging President Trump’s national emergency. These groups are challenging him in federal court stating that there was no need for him to call a national emergency. President Trump’s only response was that “I didn’t need to do this. But I’d rather do it much faster.”

While this national emergency is still in effect, the lawsuits made against his national emergency has deterred President Trump from immediately beginning the construction on his wall.

Links:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/19/trumps-words-used-against-him-in-national-emergency-lawsuits.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/02/15/what-exactly-is-national-emergency-heres-what-that-means-what-happens-next/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.7c71436c7edb
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/01/16/fact-check-mike-pence-donald-trump-drugs-crossing-southern-border-wall/2591279002/
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/15/us/politics/national-emergency-trump.html
http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/N/NationalEmergency.aspx

Who controls our beliefs? We would like to believe that we are in control, that we make our own opinions on what is happing in the world. However, what we, as a society, often fail to realize is that often our opinions are based off what media we expose ourselves to and whether or not we choose to listen to it.
https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https://cached.imagescaler.hbpl.co.uk/resize/scaleWidth/743/cached.offlinehbpl.hbpl.co.uk/news/OMC/IPATouchpoints-2017091403302675.jpg&imgrefurl=https://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/ipa-touchpoints-uk-adults-media-consumption-9/1444664&h=496&w=743&tbnid=mkB_UGkRUHbddM:&q=media+consuming&tbnh=152&tbnw=228&usg=AI4_-kRkrh1qPaOKX2Pcx2P-BbMMP6B77g&vet=12ahUKEwifjPS97afgAhWQ3oMKHeOmC60Q9QEwAHoECAUQBg..i&docid=ws8mS2Z-JMGnOM&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwifjPS97afgAhWQ3oMKHeOmC60Q9QEwAHoECAUQBg
Media today has consumed almost every aspect of our lives; whether it is from watching the news to simply checking their Instagram feed, everyone is always exposed to some form of news. This is not necessarily a bad thing – it is essential for people to stay informed about the world. However, this proves to be a potential new problem that the world has never faced: widespread disagreement of truth.

With widespread and various media coverage, events that have never before been covered are now in the forefront of the public’s attention. This is because the media has provided a way for the public to quickly view what is occurring in the world. However, the portrayal of an event in media may not be entirely truthful for everyone has their own definition of truth. Truth does not necessarily refer to what has actually occurred, but what should be done because of what certain events represent. “truth depends on early and thoroughly convincing establishment of a strange or fantastic environment, sense of another time, or unusual characters, so that we are caught up in the film’s overall spirit, mood, and atmosphere. If the filmmaker is skillful at creating this semblance of truth, we willingly agree to suspend our disbelief, and we leave our skepticism and our rational faculties behind as we enter the film’s imaginary world.”
https://www.speakertv.com/arts/arts-culture/culture-2/6-news-stories-from-2017-that-dont-involve-donald-trump/
News stories of murder and corruption, while however unfortunate, are becoming numb to the American public because of how often they appear in the news. Therefore, to combat this, news channels are making their stories more tantalizing and enchanting. Their stories have become more about their feeling about an event rather than objectifying the event that occurred. This suspension of the “truth” is a significant cause of the widespread division amongst the citizens of the United States. Each news station takes the actions in an almost extreme route to thereby maintain their viewer and ratings.

To maintain their status many news stations, take an extremely political viewpoint, for example, Fox News is uber conservative whereas a station like MSNBC takes a more liberal approach when reporting events. However, no matter which side of the aisle people support, both sources of media attempt to achieve their primary objective to tell people the news in an influential way and thereby have people return to their station to hear their next message.

Like every good story, their needs to be a villain. However, the depiction of this new-found villain is where the real problems arise and the conservative and liberal opinion clash. Take the debate over President Trump’s border wall. The Republican party argues that building a border wall will protect our country from foreign dangers. In contrast, the democrat party argues that the wall will symbolize that Americans do not want immigrants from Latin American countries, and it is America’s tradition to accept immigrants from all around the world for we are a country of immigrants.

However, because of the way that the media is covering this dilemma, there is no clash. One side is arguing over building a stronger border control whereas the other is arguing over a building something that stands against their American principles. Despite this fact, neither side is willing to discuss the same argument; it has become a passive-aggressive fight within our government to see whose opinion will be dominant. This fight for dominance will continue for the foreseeable future because of the media. Because the media has made issue such as President Trump’s border wall such a polarized issue, government officials are unlikely to be swayed from their side of the argument because of their constituents. Because of the way that these issues are now framed within the media, there is no room for common ground. Everything is a battle. Fox News has pulled over a majority of the conservatives, and a decent portion of the right-leaning moderates and MSNBC has done the same with the more liberal viewers. Both sides will look at any compromise as a “betrayal.” Now to avoid creating this image of “betrayal” government officials are now refusing to budge, despite the government shutdown. Whether this occurrence is due to their selective exposure or experiences, most constituents now predetermine their stance on almost any political issue. The media has lured the public in with their story and then traps them with their opinions – making them the real power behind the American government.

Sources:
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/9/8/16263710/fox-news-presidential-vote-study
https://www.lds.org/liahona/2016/09/young-adults/no-neutral-ground-how-media-influences-us?lang=eng
http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199793471.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199793471-e-009
https://www.ukessays.com/essays/media/the-power-of-media-media-essay.php

Welcome to Sites At Penn State. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!