PURPOSE OF THIS BLOG

PURPOSE OF THIS BLOG

This blog exists to present thinking about how our national policies could be developed in a new spirit of “One Nation . . . Indivisible”.  These are values that are in our Pledge of Allegiance, but do not seem to exist in the political processes today.  This first blog post will share the purpose for this blog and provide the basis for the thinking about specific issues that will follow in subsequent posts.

Being “One Nation … Indivisible” is not only a key part of the Pledge of Allegiance to our Republic that all Americans recite, it is in the most practical sense the key to our success as a society and the ability of America to be the “force for good” that we have mostly been in our history …. Certainly most of our recent history going back to World War I.  This does not mean that everyone in the country has all the same values, believes in all the same ideology, or would vote same way on all issues.  However, it does mean that one of the values we do share is respect for the needs and concerns of those Americans who think differently than we do.  

This simple concept seems easier to accept when it comes to religious ideologies than political ideologies, where today too many of us seem to disregard the political beliefs and ideas of those who think differently than we do.  Too many of us seem to believe that OUR political ideology is the ONLY right way to succeed, and any other ideology is doomed to fail.   Worse, we seem to accept a system where people of one party cannot objectively admit the mistakes or shortcomings of their beliefs, regardless of the facts, nor can they welcome the successes and achievements of people of the other party.  And we consistently vote for leaders who increasingly tell us that they won’t accept any compromise in their ideologies or beliefs.

I don’t understand where that arrogance comes from.  So let me ask you … is this kind of rigid ideological thinking very different from the divisions that exist in the Middle East, where governing is done on the basis of one religious ideology over another, instead of respecting the different ideologies of other major religions or sects?  When one ideology, whether political or religious, believes they are right and everyone else is wrong, there tends to be no respect for the other, and no accommodating of their needs and concerns.  To me, that is not America.  And from a practical and historical viewpoint, I don’t believe that a culture that embraces that thinking can support a strong nation, economically or otherwise. 

Our approach to governing and national policies seems to have decayed into “Win-Lose” thinking in the past few decades … there is no sense of developing policies that take into account the needs and concerns of both parties, and thus most Americans.  Most of our “leaders” today don’t actually act as “national leaders”, they represent the needs and concerns of their party or region or special interest group, without respect for or accounting for the thinking, needs and concerns of the other party or other segments of America.  It’s almost like the leaders of the opposition party are actually rooting for the failure of the governing party, to “prove” the wrongness of their approach, and of course, to ensure the election of their party in the next election.

This “our way is the only way” approach to governing, which exists on both sides and in both parties, has led to a dysfunctional government and divided country.  We are not acting as “One Nation”, and that makes us weaker at home and abroad.  I’d like to suggest as an alternative, that we adopt what Steven Covey called the “Third Alternative”, or what others call a “Win-Win” alternative.  As Covey points out in his teaching, when we are in an “independent” reality, “Win-Lose” thinking is fine.  These are situations like sports contests.  But when we are in an “interdependent” reality, like a society or a nation, then the only thinking that really prevails in the long term is “Win-Win”.  Both “Win-Lose” and “Lose-Win” thinking will decay over time as the losing party responds, sometimes in a very negative way, to having lost.   Note that in the past 17 national elections since the end of World War II, we have swung between the two major parties in terms of national leadership every 8 years with the exception of 2 elections.  It is only “Win-Win” thinking that prevails long term in an interdependent reality.

Our nation is very diverse today and becoming increasingly so.  We are diverse ethnically of course, and in gender (thankfully!).  But we are also diverse geographically and in our religious beliefs.  So it should not be a surprise that we are diverse in our political ideologies as well.  According to a June, 2015 Gallup poll, only 25% of Americans consider themselves to be “Republicans” and only 31% consider themselves to be “Democrats”.  Even when which party people “lean toward” is included in the data, the numbers are just 43% and 45%.  There just is no singular group or ideology that reflects the thinking of the majority of Americans.

So we really cannot be “One Nation” politically unless we start respecting and accommodating the needs and concerns of others who are different and have different beliefs than ourselves.  In developing national policies, our leaders need to respect and accommodate the needs and concerns of the other party, regardless of which party is in power.  And most importantly, this means developing policies that reflect the needs and concerns of the majority of the public, not the needs and concerns of one party, one region or any special interest group. 

Democracy, said George Bernard Shaw, “ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve.”  If you are a voter who elects representatives who think just like you and whom you “punish” at election time for accommodating needs and concerns that are different from yours, then might you be part of the problem? 

To become “One Nation … Indivisible” again, we must embrace as a national value the respect for the needs and concerns of others.  We can work to ensure that our beliefs, needs and concerns are accommodated in national policies, but we must also respect the different beliefs of others with some humility, and work to accommodate their needs and concerns as well.   This is not what the politicians call “compromise”.  That is often “Win-Lose” where the losers are the public.  This is not taking “pieces” of what each party wants and loading them into one policy.  This is truly working to understand the needs and concerns that constitute a “Win” for each party, and creatively developing a “Third Alternative” policy that achieves a true “Win-Win” for each party, and for the public as well. 

The future blog posts here will seek to discuss how a “Third Alternative” approach could be developed to many of our national policy issues, and demonstrate the kind of policies that could be developed from “Win-Win” thinking.  The goal will be to show that the key needs and concerns of both parties can be accommodated when the value of respecting the beliefs of others and creatively seeking that “Third Alternative” drive the process.