Issues v. Values

What do you value? Is it peace? Is it freedom? Maybe it’s friendship or some combination of all three. Whatever you feel strongly about, those values play a crucial role in shaping the way you look at the world.

Bored yet?

Sorry, but maybe you don’t value conversations about values enough. Some values are universal—the aforementioned peace, freedom and friendship being among the more cliché of them. But what about values that aren’t so cut and dry? When it comes to decision-making, such as in politics, the roles that values play is crucial.

The United States political system, complex as it may be, can be broken down into two types of issues: “issue-issues” and “value-issues.” Issue-issues are straightforward enough. When looking at one, just ask yourself: does this issue have an effect on people beyond those immediately involved? Furthermore, is that effect real and direct, with explicit and fiscal ramifications for those people? If so, congratulations, you’ve found an issue-issue! Some common examples include the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, the $9 trillion national debt, and the overall state of the economy.

Now you know how to spot a real issue. In politics, however, real issues are only half the battle. A values-issue arises more out of political necessity than out of true need. Such an issue is shrouded in ambiguity because, more often than not, religion is involved in these issues to some extent. A few obvious examples include the legality of abortion and gay marriage, and one not-so-obvious example, illegal immigration.

Notice a trend here? These three value-issues are staples of the Republican Party platform, and have been in varying degrees for some time now. They have a relatively small impact on the day-to-day lives of most Americans, and yet many of today’s Republicans continue to parade "value-issues" as though they are among the great challenges of our day. Whether or not they actually are that crucial is a moot point; their effectiveness in bringing social conservatives to the polls makes them worth talking about.

The immigration issue in particular highlights the divide between issues and values in our political system. Many would argue that illegal immigration does in fact impact our daily lives, and there’s a great deal of truth there. Americans are not just losing jobs because of illegal immigration - many more are being outsourced to foreign countries. Of course immigration laws need to be enforced. But job creation should stem from the protection of American jobs, rather than the prosecution of non-American workers.

And when it comes to Iraq, an issue-issue, which is rapidly losing weight as the problems with economy move to the forefront of the public's mind, only one-third of Americans currently approve of how President Bush is handling the war, and that’s the highest that figure has been all year. “We’ll be greeted as liberators,” and “mission accomplished” are now punch lines. “The surge” may be working, but what specifically it’s working towards and why it’s taken this long is still anyone’s guess. However, support for the war comes almost entirely from social conservatives, including many of the 2008 Republican presidential candidates, who believe in the concept of a “global war on terror”—as if the U.S. and terror were at one point on speaking terms.

When the primaries are through and the time to appeal to a truly national audience comes, whichever Republican prevails will face two unenviable tasks: downplaying their stance on the war to attract undecided voters, and downplaying the fact that they’re downplaying their stance in order to maintain a sense of integrity. Coming from a party that is traditionally “anti-government,” this is a dangerous game of politics for anyone to play.

In one’s own private life, values provide the closest thing to a reason for our existence. To the extent that politics is the antithesis of private life, however, values and blind conviction too often cloud sound judgment. Politics is not a values game. Our government exists to serve the people, not to impose the values of those who hold office. When politicians lose sight of this, especially in the face of presidential politics, they stop being public servants, and start becoming public zealots.