The hierarchy of politics is a complex subject of principle. At the start of human civilization it is inevitable that the existence of politics is needed. The basic structure of society needs leadership. Politics is there to serve as the science of governance. However, there are many different views on how to govern a certain society. Moreover, there are also different views on how to perceive democracy. It has been one of the hottest topics nowadays. Obviously, it is intertwined with the view on what to do with the current situation of politics.
Conservative and liberal are one those parties that collide when it comes to principle. There are people who are fighting for democracy. Undeniably, democracy as well is so broad that it could cause political crisis to a nation. Among this basic issue is morality. There are arguments that morality should be based from God. People are acting on the said topic on how to deal with morality whether it should be for the greater good of all people or a certain part of the society. It is very essential to governance to seek the common good. It may be hypocritical for many religious organizations but that is the view of politics. However, that is not the basic issue in regard to political crisis per se.
In particular, there was a global political crisis during the 1960s. The elevation of cold war because of the Soviet Union’s creation of the Berlin Wall has caused several ties to be broken. Additionally, the Cuban Nuclear Missile Crisis had almost started a nuclear war between the United States and the Soviet Union. Moreover, youth urban riots as well as protest against the Vietnam War brought new ideas of democracy. These trying times has made the people to be more concerned of how the government administered their country (Office of the Historian, n.p.).
In the United States, there was uproar in the late 1960’s in the scene of politics. The political crisis aroused when there was a need for change as per groups against the current status-quo. Many are against the communist view and they are looking to any options in abolishing it. The young American freedom (YAF) group has given a statement about a certain political view that would later on be a subject of intrigue. They have in lined their principle to a statement made by a newspaper editor and activists named Stanton Evans. The statement of the group could be summed up to the morality and the role of the government in the progress of the economy. There are so many partial views on the statement but it can also be summarized as the central idea of modern American conservatism. It was held in Sharon, Connecticut.
Elaborating these principles could be the functionality of moral values in a society. Somehow, it would be directly related to political and economic liberty. The Sharon statement represents the body of the conservative youth that is promoting the essential freedom of what they think United States needed at that time. They are giving out a definition on how the government shall administer to fulfill its duty to the citizens. It also emphasizes the role of the Constitution. The law shall provide full sovereignty over the people by protecting them at the same time controlling the concentration of power to avoid abuse. The statement has made several reaction waves to the Americans. It also promotes that the market economy should be the one single market system they would follow. The market economy provides fair play in the market as well as encourages large production of supply for the needs of the American people. This would give a free competition in the market and would not promote the government’s involvement. The statement also wanted to abolish the ties of the nation to communism. The statement encourages the current government at that time to severe the communist ties to further establish a one single sovereign government (IIP Technology, n.p.).
The Sharon statement has been given by these young great thinkers as a reaction of what is happening to the global politics. The crisis has made waves to the point that it can affect the entire production of all countries worldwide. Elevation of a World War III could further do more damage to the people. This can make them feel that the entire world is a measurement of nothing but power. That is also why they are saying that the number one detractor of the government to make the United States a more progressive country is communism. This could not be taken so lightly by that time because of the Vietnam War. Many youths are aware of what is happening to the country. They even condemned the nomination of Vice President Hubert Humphrey for the presidency when in fact he is a Vietnam War supporter. They stressed that the government shall not seek coexistence with communism instead wipe it out (The Heritage Foundation, n.p.).
The stand of YAF is that the American Citizen can only achieve freedom when they can have security within their country as well as the freedom to defend their common rights. This could be appealed as freedom on the basis of human level. The American citizen is dependent to the government but they are also or must be self-sufficient to be able to defend their rights.
If there was a conservative faction of the youth there are also young radicals at that time. They are also essential functional group that has also made an impact to the societal view of governance. They are still one of those groups that has emerged because of the recent global war issues particularly the Cold War. They are named as the SDS or the Students for Democratic Society.
The primary contributor of the Port Huron Statement is Tom Hayden one of the students in University of Michigan. But he is not alone he is helped by about 58 other members of the SDS. The Port Huron Statement was completed last June 15, 1962. The statement was presented at Port Huron, Michigan. This is also the group’s first national convention.
The group’s main argument is that the American problems need a radical change or a vision. This is for the betterment of the country’s economic as well unitary growth. They are giving statements about the government’s side on war machineries. They are against violence and purportedly recommended the disarmament method. They are promoting this method to avoid violence in terms of internal conflicts. The SDS also wanted to emphasize that deterrence and arms control should be wiped out and change with the universal control of disarmament (Reber, n.p.).
They are also pushing for the reform of the Democratic Party. They are promoting equal treatment for the southern part of the state. Moreover, they are also promoting equality for Negro men. They are demanding that the Democratic Party must support Negro candidates as well as the implementation of southern populaces’ participation for the election. Basically, they are against racism. They are presenting the idea that if a person will continually be a racist, they will eventually hurt the core of the society. However, they have not also closed their doors for research that could prove their point against racism (Hayden, n.p.).
Third and last point of the statement is that the movement of students in Universities should be highly empowered. They are insisting that the rise of youth, participating in the events of the society provides real freedom. Hence, the word participatory democracy has been coined. It is a radical move from the youth movement. They are challenging as well the status quo of the government. They also regard men as precious beings that deserve affirmation, care, freedom and love. Lastly, the statement also placed the government as an entity that blinds the people of what they deserve because of business interest and intention for greater military power. And they don’t want that to continually happen in the near future.
Both of those statements emphasize the importance of the role of the common citizen. They are both developed to create a spike that the people need to be aware of what their society has become. However, they also differ in some points. It is essential for the Sharon Statement to be in lined with the government but proposed to eliminate of communism. They offer an idea that liberty or true freedom could not be achieved without economic freedom. Though the statement only tackles the market economy as well as the exclusion of communism from the society, it doesn’t suggest any radical transformation in the democratic aspect of the United States. As a conservative party, they are also basing their beliefs to the idea of free-will provided by God.
On the other hand, the Port Huron Statement offers a radical view of the society. They could be considered a mini-communist statement, but they are more on the liberty of the individual. Giving freedom to people that they should deserve is the priority of the said recommendation. They are also promoting participatory democracy that every citizen should be involved on what is happening to their country. They are both defining freedom on a different note. The Sharon Statement is giving the government the responsibility to provide sovereignty and economic security and the individual should also have enough capabilities to defend their selves is true freedom. On the other hand, the Port Huron Statement is majorly considering the existence of marginalized population. That those population even though they are discriminated they still have the option to have freedom.
They have a bit of similarity when it comes to people’s engagement to the government’s decision towards national issue. They are both statement that are evidences of how a citizen should be engaged with the societal issues happening around them. It is already part of the history, and both statements have given good views for every American Citizen.
Works Cited
Hayden, Tom. "Participatory Democracy: From the Port Huron Statement to Occupy Wall Street." The Nation 7 Mar. 2012: n. pag. Web. <http://www.thenation.com/article/participatory-democracy-port-huron-statement-occupy-wall-street/>.
The Heritage Foundation. "The Sharon Statement." The Heritage Foundation. N.p., 10 Sept. 1960. Web. 25 Apr. 2016. <http://www.heritage.org/initiatives/first-principles/primary-sources/the-sharon-statement>.
IIP Digital. "Decades of Change - 1960-1980 | IIP Digital." Home | IIP Digital | U.S. Department of State. N.p., 5 Apr. 2008. Web. 25 Apr. 2016. <http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/publication/2008/04/20080407123655eaifas0.7868769.html#axzz46szAiikC>.
Office of the Historian. "The Berlin Crisis, 1958–1961 - 1953–1960 - Milestones." Office of the Historian. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Apr. 2016. <https://history.state.gov/milestones/1953-1960/berlin-crises>.
Reber, Gary. "Participatory Democracy: From The Port Huron Statement To Occupy Wall Street | For Economic Justice." For Economic Justice | Socialism Has Been Discredited. Plutocracy is in the Process of Being Discredited. Democratic Capitalism Has Yet to Be Tried. N.p., 21 Apr. 2012. Web. 25 Apr. 2016. <http://www.foreconomicjustice.org/962/participatory-democracy-from-the-port-huron-statement-to-occupy-wall-street>.
