Letter to the Editor
Idealism, not empathy, animates liberalism
In his Sept. 1 column"Liberalism and the News," Zach Wahls claims that empathy is a trait most often associated with liberals, which is why the majority of journalists are liberal (they get to know people while reporting, so they feel for them, etc.). However, I think it has a lot less to do with empathy and more to do with idealism.
Generally, liberals differ from conservatives in that they favor more government involvement for certain things, such as social programs. This isn't because liberals are more empathetic. It's because they put inordinate amounts of trust in a huge bureaucratic mess they think can solve a lot of problems, when it actually ends up wasting a lot of money. They seem to think that as long as the ideas behind the social programs are great and the government sets everything up, it will work out if we just pay the taxes.
Conservatives can be just as empathetic. However, they are aware of the government's limits in actually running so many programs successfully. As a result, they want to use their money to help people as they choose, instead of handing it off to an enormous system, which will flush half of it down the toilet. They may agree that some of the social programs have great ideas behind them, but they know the government cannot deliver everything it promises.
So what does this have to do with journalists? Many of them are overly idealistic, just like many liberals. They think they can change the world by "reporting the raw truth" but merely end up molding stories as they choose to attract enough readers and ad buyers. It's idealism, not empathy, that makes most journalists liberal.
Liz Schorsch
UI sophomore
comments powered by Disqus
