Tuesday, November 6, 2012

On Being American, Part II.

In case anyone has been living under a rock (in which case you probably wouldn't be reading my blog, so that statement makes little sense...), today is voting day. I sent in my absentee ballot about six weeks ago in the hopes that it would make it home to Maine in time for elections. I have no way of know for sure, but as all the rest of my mail has arrived in ten to fourteen days, I think it's safe to assume that I have successfully voted in my first Presidential election.

It's weird and a little bit challenging to be eleven and a half hours separated from Eastern Standard Time. Right now it is actually almost 4 am Wednesday morning for me in Coimbatore, and yet much of America will still not have voted. For me, today has been a long day of jitters every time I remember that the fate of the America I return to will be decided in the next twenty-four hours.

The US Presidential elections are a big deal even in a place as far away as India. In fact, as some here have pointed out, the policies that the president will put into effect might have more of an impact on the average Indian than they will on the average American. Controversies like approval of FDI (foreign direct investment) in India are hot-button topics for people here. Starbucks has recently come to India, and Wal-Mart is on its way in. Globalization such as this could be really harmful to the economy of India, which is already so fragile to begin with.

With all the publicity this election is getting here, people have been asking us frequently about our political beliefs and who we want to win. As a politically diverse group of students from all over the country, this is a difficult question to answer. Instead, we've been deflecting and attempting to learn the Indian perspective on the presidential candidates. It has been really interesting. Apparently, most of the countries in the world, India included, support Obama over Romney. A conversation I had with a few women earlier this week confirmed this opinion. The women said that they liked Obama's charisma and that it wasn't his fault he took over during such a tumultuous time. They said that if he were president instead of George W. Bush, America would have been in a much better place back in 2008. They also said that they want him to have another term so that he can actually have some time to start getting things done.

As much as I agreed with most of what they said, it was all I could do to not contradict them at that statement (and one of the women was the secretary of the college I attend here -- a role similar to the president in Indian colleges-- so it would have been really inappropriate to do so). Four years is the term of the American presidency. It shouldn't be a requirement that a president have two terms to get things done. The first term should be long enough. I really don't want Romney to be president, but the reasons these women were giving frustrated me as a participant in the American political system. It's hard to represent a country that everybody thinks they have some right to an opinion on. Yes, America is influential in the world. Yes, people here are more informed about my politics than I am about theirs. But to have die-hard opinions about the governing system of a country you've never visited and is nothing like your own seems a little ridiculous to me.

That being said, I am even more interested to hear the results of the Maine-specific topics that I voted for. I want to see Angus King in the Senate. And most of all, I want everybody in Maine to have the chance to marry whomever they love. I don't think it's fair at all that some people are denied basic human rights because they happen to love someone who is the same sex as they are. I will be seriously disappointed if Maine chooses to deny this right to people during this election. All I can say is that at least I voted this time. I think.

3 comments:

  1. Plenty of people, myself included, think that a four year term is an insufficient amount of time, mostly due to the fact that a president has to be so conscious of his or her actions during the first term if they want to be re-elected. They spend a good chunk of they president campaigning to be re-elected. I think one six-year or eight-year term without the possibility of re-election would be a much more sensible option. But instead we cling to a 215-year-old document filled with anachronistic principles to tell us how to run our government.
    廉姆

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And I get that. It makes sense to have a longer term where things could be more effective. But it gets really frustrating here that everyone thinks they understand American politics more than any American. Because even when they do understand in theory, they never have a clue about what it is like to actually live there so typically the things that come out of their mouths are never that accurate.

      Delete
  2. ^ Liam, is that you?
    Yay for voting, Aleena! Your vote matters. Angus is our new senator, and no need to be 'seriously disappointed'; yes on 1 prevailed. xoxo ~mama

    ReplyDelete