Sunday, October 10, 2010

Reflection #7

During the presentations, I found myself torn. How can I, both an American and one who is aware of the environment vote and inevitably shun one side? In the simulation, I noticed that those who argued pro-tax were primarily focused on jobs, the American populace, and the American market. On the other hand, those who opposed the taxes argued heavily in favor of the environment and the prices of the cars. Both sides had their rights and both sides had their wrongs. What it really boils down to is the president choosing between the American populace and the international environment. By actively engaging in a simulation as such, I really realized how tough a decision this is to lie on the shoulder’s of an individual. Though our faux-president was by no means pressured by his nation and the international world, I could still he was slightly anxious. No matter which route he chose, one side would hate him.This simulation in turn made me reflect on the role of the president as a whole. Yes, it is ingrained in us to know that the presidency is a busy and hectic job. But what we are neglected to be explicitly taught is how morality is so intertwined in the job as well. Does the president dare go against his nation and add to the unemployment rate? Or does he stay strong to his people but continue to hurt the ozone levels? What is the moral decision? This is something I give the presidents credit – their ability to deal with these situations.

1 comment:

  1. Elana:

    I definitely agree that the job of the president encompasses the most complicated facets of morality and ethics. This is perhaps why the political world always jokes about the futility of "right" in this power position. Is it possible for the president to ever make the righteous decision or is it simply a question of graduations? What is the lesser of two evils? I give those running for president a lot of credit for their willingness to test their principles in the highest way possible.