Jesus Gil

Mrs. Ghan
AP Government
21 September 2015
Political Profile Paper
As part of the political compass survey which I took, I was scored between a
moderate liberal and moderate. That means that I can swing between both sides of
politics but mostly I'd side with liberals. I was also analyzed and shown that my views
relate towards those of libertarians. I do believe this outcome represents my political
views given the influence I've reached from the world around me and how I've come to
see it.
Much of the class came to the same conclusion of identifying more on the liberal
side. An explanation as to why most of us may have this similar viewpoint is because
we are exposed to a great diversity in public schools that we see broad needs of the
people. I am very aware of every need that people around me demand or don't get
enough of, whether it's from financial assistance to needing to voice more of their
opinion. Some of the major influences shaping my political views are my family, my
school/education, and what the media exposes to me. Through a young age, I would
always notice my parents' cynical attitude towards the government yet not comprehend
why they thought the way they did. Usually I was taught, at school, that everything was

alright and that when I grow up I'll become a model citizen voicing my opinion and
voting. However, I became more exposed to politics through friends and the media as I
got older. Although my parents did help in showing me not to be instated into a certain
party or view of thought because there is something always wrong, my friends and
peers showed me how imperative it is to think of and aid everyone. The media helped
enforce the views that my parents showed me because I saw so many different stations
I was presented with different sides on things, such as university students' on the U.S.
having a negative effect on foreign affairs and government spending on certain
programs such as naval units. My parents are not very politically active, but they do side
with liberals because they do fall into category with the group's liberals try to aid or
represent.
I would identify myself as a moderate liberal or nearly moderate. This was
something the class is abundant in, but not as much the general public. It's shown that
more people identify just as liberal, but there is a fairly large amount of people
identifying within the same group as me. An explanation for more people becoming
moderate is because they are straying from the parties which they believe are taking on
a view too drastic or far from what they would consider a happy medium. I wouldn't have
a direct partisanship to a party or organization. I'd actually spend time studying which
candidate serves best for the situation of all the people, which usually tends to be
liberal, and if not then I'll simply not vote for people I don't believe should be fully
supported.

My political tolerance is very stern, yet empathetic. For example, I believe it's alright
for atheists and communists to be exercising their first amendment rights because it's
their beliefs and so they are free to express. It's not until it comes to racists to which I
simply can't tolerate the views expressed. It's taking a natural privilege and contorting it
for the purpose of cruelty. To me, it's simply alright to express views but when they
damage, dehumanize, or are driven on malicious intent to discriminate, then there is no
reason to to even be listened to or taken into serious consideration as part of the
civilization. In a case of neo-Nazis protesting outside a Holocaust museum, it's a simple
intolerance from me because they are publically offending those who have their families
or relatives identified in memoriam or are part of the same groups to have gone through
or understand the issue. That can easily be stated as a form of discrimination because
it's not a subtle slur, it's an offense to an entire group. Subjectively, they're being
discriminating, but objectively, they're exercising a constitutional right. However, failed
by many people to see, they're disrupting the peace.
I feel as if I lie on fifty-fifty with trust in the government. I'm not one of those people
who see things as corrupt and sold out, which is something a lot of people believe, but I
do have an issue with how much a human influence has on decision making. I can't just
agree or depend on all the voters to make important or serious decisions, and so much
of what I see is votes being in the favor of the individual voter. Because of that, I don't
hold much trust in political institutions, especially when I hear any of the candidates
referring in their agendas with what they believe is something morally correct or under
any influence of a dogma -- my view is that they shouldn't bring up religion or affiliation
into politics, that being for equity reasons between everyone. I have seen many times in

the news where religion or cultural pride destroys political just or becomes such an
issue that people will defend it because it's their same belief. A recent example being
Kim Davis being let out of prison after denying to issue a marriage license to a samesex couple; she was not only pardoned from her sentence for entitling her beliefs in law,
she regained her job through support of people demanding that she had reason in
denying the couple. Another case is where an atheist group complained there were too
many Catholics in court, and that there had to be more diversity of religions in court, but
people became outraged in defense that their religion was just and that there was no
reason for change. A final case being the republican nominees thanking God or putting
God as a savior of the country when discussing their plans in presidency. Almost with
any other political aspects, police and policies, I have either indifference or moderate
trust that things will work out.
My political efficacy, how strongly I believe I'll affect the government, is
moderate. I do believe that I can be a small part of a larger whole, but unless there is
that larger whole, then realistically I know there won't be much of a point in going for
that group or party. Many people may feel that they don't have an effect on politics,
which may come from the unawareness of where most views are put, and so they
decide that their vote isn't worth it. As shown in recent polls, around half of the U.S. has
been voting in previous elections, and so much of the discontent with the current
leaders may just be hypocritical regret at what the public, or some of it, decided. If there
was a way for people to see how much effect they had on polls, given the voting
population, then they might see that if they vote, and get others to vote, they might get

results they want. It's as simple as saying most people won't donate money to a charity
they don't know how will aid a cause. They need to be informed of their contribution.
As said already, I identify myself as a leaning liberal, but I'm also very close to
being considered moderate. My ideology is that if it's for a better society, can easily
present all the right things for the issue at hand, and is just in the sense that there is
equity, then it's something that needs to be taken seriously. Referring back to the
political tolerance, there is equity in having beliefs, but when it becomes disruptive, then
it must not be taken lightly -- that applies to whichever side of the issue. I'm not that far
off in identification from the general public. Many people show to be within the same
spectrum in polls -- moderate liberal -- but many still identify as just liberals.