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 2nd 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