The nature of the conflict between the two parties in the U.S.

Xingguo Zhang

2024-09-10

Some people on the Internet say "If you supported the Democratic Party, then you could not be a true Christian."

Such people equate the conflict between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party in the United States with the conflict between Christianity and its oppositions. Such a conclusion is ridiculous.

Kamala Harris is a member of the Baptist Church. Joe Biden is a Catholic. They are both Christians. On the principle of freedom and democracy, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party have highly consistent views. We can see many evidence of this because the US government's foreign policy was largely consistent when there were a transition from one party to another in the U.S. government.

I’d say the conflict between the two parties is not a conflict between good and evil. It is not a conflict between Christianity and its oppositiion. It is not even a conflict between right and wrong. I’d say the conflict between the two parties is a conflict of different emphases. It is a conflict of different priorities.

Take a look at the tax rate. One side says that the highest tax rate should be 37%, and the other side says that the highest tax rate should be 39.6%. Can one say which tax rate is right and which is wrong? This is obviously because the two sides have different emphasis, or different priorities.

 

In early June this year, after Biden announced a suspension of asylum applications, the number of illegal immigrants arrested at the US-Mexico border plummeted by 33% in July, reaching a new low since September 2020. According to the Associated Press, the US-Mexico border suspended asylum applications from June 5 because the number of illegal immigrants entering the United States on that day exceeded the daily limit of 2,500. After the establishment of maximum limit at the border, the number of illegal immigrants arrested has dropped by 55%, and before that, the Mexican government strengthened border enforcement, which greatly reduced the number of immigrants entering the United States illegally earlier this year.

Not only on the issue of illegal immigration, but also on abortion, LGBTQ, and other thorny issues, the differences between the two parties are also differences in emphasis.

Trump recently said that the issue of abortion should be decided by each state. Trump obviously does not regard the issue of abortion as a question of right and wrong. He will disappoint many conservatives.

Kamala Harris is quite focused on the issue of abortion. The most extreme thing she did was to participate in the drafting of a California bill in 2016, requiring that a notice about the government's services for pregnant women be posted in the Crisis Pregnancy Center run by churches. The bill she drafted was struck down by the court two years later. Since then, Harris has only been paying lip service on abortion issue.

Now we can see that both sides are moving towards the middle on the issues of abortion and border management. In fact, other policies of the two sides are not far apart.

I oppose those who elevates the differences between the two American parties to the religious level. I think today we need to work hard to get American politics back on the track of mutual respect and civilized dialogue.
 

Trump is a narcissist. However, with the US Constitution, it is unlikely that he would cause a big mess as president. And he would definitely step down in four years. I support Harris not because I agree with Harris' policies, but because I think Trump is not suitable.

Harris is not particularly smart. I hope she knows that she is not very capable and does things the Biden's way, following the rules and political traditions and not making trouble.

Obama followed the rules and U.S. political traditions in his first four years. Because he very much wanted to be re-elected. He did well. In the next four years, there was no need for re-election. He acted a little recklessly. In 2012, Trayvon Martin was shot and killed by George Zimmerman in Florida. Obama said, "If I had a son, he would look like Trayvon." He turned a criminal case into a political event which suppressed the police force and incited racial dissatisfaction. Obama's words and actions on the Trayvon Martin incident were completely wrong.

If Kamala Harris became president, it would be her first four years, and she would generally not cause trouble. If Trump were president, it would be his last four years. I don't know what damage he, as a convicted felon and a narcissist, would cause for the country.

I am not very pessimistic about the 2024 election. I believe that no matter what the result of the election is, the American democratic system will successfully cope with new challenges and prevail. I believe that in a few years, American politics will return to the tradition of mutual respect and civilized dialogue.

=== below is the Chinese version ===

美國兩黨之間差別的性質是什麽？
章興國
2024-09-10
網上有人說 “如果你支持民主黨，那麽你不可能是真的基督徒。”
這樣的人把美國共和黨與民主黨的衝突，等同於基督徒與其對立麵的衝突。這樣的結論是很荒謬的。
賀錦麗是浸信會 成員。 拜登是天主教徒。他們都是基督徒。 在自由，民主的原則問題上，民主黨與共和黨有高度一致的理念。這一點，從美國政府外交政策上的連貫性，我們看到很明顯的證據。
我認為 兩個黨的衝突不是 正義與邪惡之間的衝突。不是基督徒與其對立麵的衝突。 甚至不是對與錯的衝突。我認為兩個黨的衝突是側重點不同的衝突。是不同 priority 的衝突。
看一看稅率。 一方說最高稅率應該是 37%，另外一方說最高稅率應該是 39.6%。 這兩者之間是對與錯的問題嗎？ 這明顯的是側重點不一致的問題。
今年六月初，拜登宣布庇護申請暫停受理之後，美墨邊界的非法入境者被捕的人數七月份暴跌33%，達到2020年9月以來的新低。據美聯社報道，美墨邊界從六月五日暫停受理庇護申請，暫停的因為是當日非法進入美國的人數已經超過每日2500人的上限。在邊界設立庇護熔斷機製之後，非法入境者被捕的人數已經減少55%，而且在這之前，墨西哥政府加強了邊境執法力度，從而在今年稍早大大減少了非法進入美國的移民人數。

不僅在非法移民問題上，在墮胎，同性戀，等等棘手的問題上，兩個黨的差別也是側重點不同的差別。
川普最近說墮胎問題應該由各個州自己決定。川普顯然不把墮胎問題看成是 對於錯 的問題。他會讓很多保守派人士失望。
賀錦麗在墮胎問題上很用心。她做的最極端的事情，也就是2016年參與了起草加州的一個法案，要求在教會辦的孕婦協助中心 (Crisis Pregnancy Center) 裏，貼一個關於政府有給孕婦提供服務的告示。她搞的法案兩年後被法庭取締了。從那之後，賀錦麗在墮胎問題上，也就是動動嘴皮子而已。
現在可以看到，兩邊在墮胎，管理邊界的問題上，都在向中間移動。其實，兩邊的其它政策也相差不遠。
我反對把兩個美國黨派之間的差別 提高到宗教層麵的言論。我認為 今天我們需要為美國政治 重新回到 互相尊重，文明對話的軌道 而努力。

川普是自戀者。但是，有美國憲法在，他作為總統折騰出大亂子的可能性不是很大。而且他四年以後一定下台。我支持賀錦麗，不是因為我讚成賀錦麗的政策，而是因為我覺得川普這個人不合適。
賀錦麗不是特別聰明。但願她自知能力不強，做事情按照拜登的路子，循規蹈矩，不折騰就好。
奧巴馬的頭四年是循規蹈矩的。因為他非常想連任。所以做的還行。 後麵的四年，沒有連任的需求了。他有些胡來。2012 年 Trayvon Martin 被 George Zimmerman 槍殺。奧巴馬說“如果我有兒子，他可能長得與 Trayvon 一樣”。他把一件刑事案件，變成了打壓警察，煽動種族之間不滿情緒 的政治事件。奧巴馬在 Trayvon Martin 事件上的言行完全錯了。
如果賀錦麗做總統的話，那將是她的頭四年，一般不會胡來。川普做的話，那將是他的後四年。不知道作為罪犯和自戀者的他會怎麽折騰。
我對 2024 年的大選沒有很悲觀。我相信無論大選的結果如何，美國的民主體製都會成功地應付新的挑戰，接受新的檢驗。我相信 幾年之後，美國政治會回到互相尊重，文明對話的軌道上來。