WE ARE THE PEOPLE WE ELECTED

And the constant outpouring of angry words with no consideration of other perspectives is the precursor to bullets.

There is not, nor has there ever been, one elected official who has ever garnered enough votes to be able to say that they speak for all Americans.  Anyone who does so is like the teenager who argues that everyone is doing it.

Governing bodies exist to find solutions in either proactive or reactive mode, per current situations and events, and this is not a zero sum game.  There are not and never should be winners or losers.  All opinions and ideas are welcome and great discussion and debate are encouraged. Arguably, the better the discussion; the better the decision, provided, the discussion includes thoughtful questioning followed by some respectful listening.

Just as there is not one elected official who represents all, so too will be the case with decisions made.  Never will everyone be pleased with a decision.  Never.  And I know well enough “to never say never”, but in a world of 7 billion and a country of 320 million, never will everyone agree on any one thing. 

The rule of the majority is no longer indicative of anything other than this is the best we can do at this time.  There really is not any other way for a democracy to come to a decision.  Without the opportunity to “call the vote”, analytical paralysis would set in.  We need deadlines, be they contrived or not.  At some point in time, after we have heard from all quarters, call the vote and make the best decision we can for now.  We can change it later if it doesn’t work.

A zero sum game is a kind of change that takes place in a closed system within which the winner derives their winnings entirely from the loser.  Closed systems are very rare and examples of not-closed systems include business and government.  There are always new inputs, new opportunities and new challenges.  For example, every second 1 or 2 new people are born into the world.  Each one of these births causes a varied amount of change.  And yes these changes may be small parts of the whole (what is 1 divided by 7 billion?) but they never stop.  The system is not closed and it is not static.  The world we live in is an ever-changing system of events beginning, expanding, closing and contracting.  The forever constant is change. 

If the majority vote concept exists mostly for the purpose of making decisions, towards what objective are we striving?  How do we stay somewhat consistent in our decisions?  If we don’t stand for something, if we don’t believe in some values or principles, towards what end are we making these decisions? What is the ultimate objective?  Though we may never achieve it, is it not helpful to believe in something, such as certain unalienable rights for all men and women?

  

These unalienable rights were written in a brief not too very long ago. They are a simple statement of an idea (or ideal?) that has given rise to a unique country full of diverse and independent characters.  We the people are the product of this document.  With this document at our core, what did you think Americans might become? 

We have had some challenges interpreting some of these foundational words, beginning with “we the people” and “all men”, but we’re working on it.   We have evolved to perhaps now know that these words refer to “diversity”, which was not part of this word’s definition back then.  And though we are all remarkably similar, we are all also very and completely different.  No two Americans are alike and we are extremely proud of that!  These foundational documents gave us not only the permission, but also a self-definition of “an American”.  And yes we can be ugly!

Americans are free to pursue life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, as long as we do not harm or infringe too much upon another person.  And perhaps we have evolved to know that harm is as much mental as it is physical. (cyber-bullying)  Our thoughts and beliefs are mental events and we are each entitled to our own.  Forcing ideas and beliefs upon another is just as harmful as beating them with a big stick.

We have instituted government upon ourselves so that we might be able to adapt to the changing world and create, and adjust as needed, some guidelines as to what is and is not acceptable behavior.  But in a country that now exceeds 320 million proudly independent people, finding the right words for these guidelines is tricky.  For example, the 2^nd amendment; how many different interpretations are there to these 27 words?  Putting them into a complete sentence might have helped, but would that have been better?

Could you do better?  If not you, who?

As proudly independent individuals we all have opinions regarding these recent shutdown and debt ceiling events but few if any of us know the full complexities involved.   We choose to take our information from the sources we like and we disregard and degrade the sources we don’t like.  We choose, to state and restate our opinions repeatedly and with more volume, thinking that we can force someone to agree.  We think we can talk, threaten and or beat others into submission. 

The constant outpouring of angry words, without any consideration of other perspectives, is a precursor to bullets. 

What we, we the people, are not doing is asking why others think as they do?  We, not those we elected, but you and me, we are not open to debate and discussion.  And until we are, so will our government be.

How’s that go again … a government by the people, of the people and for the people.    

--- Steve Gatter                             

Charlotte, NC