Neutrality in Society: Orenthal James Simpson

After we had watched the flurry of O.J. videos in Global recently, I began to think about what kind of place he had in society, during the onset of the civil rights movement. I think it is interesting to think, someone can capture so much attention, simply by not having a stance on anything. After that, I began to wonder, is that really such a bad idea? Should we really let certain facets of society, continuously divide us, as a human race? I am very much into politics, and am a member of the Youth Alliance for Justice, so taking a stance on something has always been something that I have cared about. However, now I began to see it through the eyes of a young black celebrity during the civil rights movement. It really paid off to be silent, because you would no longer be defined into a certain category. The Black Panthers were Maoists, Gandhi was a libertarian socialist, and the American Indian Movement had its backing by the Peace and Freedom Party. What was O.J.? Just a man, not an ideology. I do not think everyone needs to take a stance on everything, in order to be a prominent member of society. After all, the very basis of living your own life, should be, that you can enjoy it any way you see fit, and with enough amount of certainty that you can live it correctly. Perhaps O.J. was able to live his life without any way or want to delve into the realm of politics, but as I sit here, I still don't see that to be a very bad thing at all. After all, who is to say our own politicians in Washington mean what they say, anyway?