WHEN Republican presidential nominee John McCain announced Sarah Palin as his choice for vice-president, the media riveted on Palin and what she represents. It’s no wonder: The high-energy Alaskan governor means many things to many people.
To working mothers, she represents the possibility of a woman holding a job while raising a family. To some feminists, she embodies an advancement in women’s rights. But more fundamentally, Palin has become a lightning rod for voters throughout the US by appealing to social conservatives on key ideological issues.
What strain of social conservatism is Palin channeling? Like many other western states, Alaska embraces the values of a rugged wilderness–a land with relatively few people, where guns and hunting are routine parts of life and where social interactions revolve around shared community and church activities.
Voters who live in small towns tend to live in relatively homogenous communities. They feel threatened by the nontraditional lifestyles they see portrayed on television. They may worry more about the preservation of “family values” than about policy issues related to economics or foreign affairs.
The buzzword “family values” means different things to different people. But a politician who advocates “family values” will likely stress the importance of a “nuclear family”, where a mother and father live under the same roof. The morality associated with “family values” often presumes a literal interpretation of the Bible, as well as the assumption that the family will attend church and participate in service activities, such as helping homeless people.
Perhaps their most polarizing belief is the “pro-life” assertion that abortion should be made illegal (citing Christian doctrine) and that “creationism” (God created the universe and Adam and Eve, etc.) should be taught in schools alongside evolution.
It is not easy for Asians and Europeans to understand the influence “family values” have on American politics. But there are several facts that can help put social conservatism in context. First, in terms of sheer numbers, more than 80 percent of Americans identify themselves as Christian. One-third of these consider themselves to be “evangelical”. These may very well vote for a social conservative candidate on a Republican ticket. But one should also keep in mind that there are many types of conservatives in the US.
Moderate conservatives may care more about controlling government spending and limiting the “intrusion” of the federal government on state government than they do about abortion and school prayer. They might be registered Republicans; but they might also be “Independents”, meaning they base their vote not on party affiliation, but on the individual candidate and the issues. Therefore, it is not easy or wise to label conservative voters or make simplistic predictions about the American election.
At long last, the political debate has begun in earnest and will continue until November. It will be interesting to see how America’s diverse communities, with their inherently pluralist belief sets, will respond to the choices they face.

（责任编辑：）

共2页,当前第1页  第一页  前一页  下一页