Mac Mcclelland's Goodbye Columbus

1162 Words3 Pages

Overtime, politics has evolved to be an omniscient and ambiguous force in our society. It is defined by opinions, assertions, and beliefs of certain individuals without always having any real reason to its existence. These rules which govern the people are constantly changing and becoming more elaborate to the point where their purpose becomes vague and uncertain. According to an assertion made by George Orwell, “In our age there is no such thing as “keeping out of politics.” All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred and schizophrenia” (Orwell). This assertion essentially defines our society, for there is no true “keeping out of politics”. We involve politics in all we do, so that …show more content…

Ultimately, controversies in politics are the result of miscommunications and false evidence. Therefore, it is because of them that there exists a sense of ambiguity in a candidate’s campaign. In “Goodbye Columbus” by Mac McClelland, the author explains how it is through the government’s tangled web of limitations and increasing restrictions that there is a distrust and blame toward the government. This is accentuated when McClelland writes how “the Ohio Education Association says Kasich’s budget will cost 10,000 public education jobs- nearly 5 percent of such jobs in the state,” (McClelland). As time progresses, more and more jobs are being taken from individuals which creates a conflict for the individual to survive. Because of this, it proposes that individuals may not always trust their political leaders because once-held promises are no longer kept. This same sort of political ambivalence is evident in “Partly Cloudy Patriot” by Sarah Vowell. Here, the speaker presents an almost hesitant disposition in her political beliefs. She explains, “the ubiquity of the flag came to feel like peer pressure to always stand behind policies one might not necessarily agree with,” (Vowell). Ultimately, Vowell is stating that controversies arise in politics because of its lack of concreteness and certainty. A candidate’s words or actions are …show more content…

Politics essentially receives the blame for what is unjust and unfair, so that its very definition is no longer clear. One instance of this occurs in “Shooting an Elephant” by George Orwell. Here, the essence of doing what is right is prioritized not by the justice of doing what is right, but rather the fear of being made a fool. After the elephant dies, Orwell writes, “And afterwards I was very glad that the coolie had been killed; it put me legally in the right and it gave me a sufficient pretext for shooting the elephant,” (Orwell). The speaker simply killed the elephant because he felt it necessary in order to avoid being made to look inferior or foolish. Not only are his priorities here distorted, but they exemplify the corruptness that politics sometimes take on. In a political atmosphere, there is not always reasoning for why something occurs, yet there exists a need to create reason. In the stories “Serving in Florida” by Barbara Ehrenreich and “On Seeing England for the First Time” by Jamaica Kincaid, the corrupt nature of politics is further demonstrated, and the notion to always place blame on politics is further justified. In Ehrenreich’s writing, she states how the government expects one to survive on minimum wage but does not provide the resources to do so. She writes, “we’re averaging only about $7.50 an hour. Then

Open Document