Checkbox Checked!

In thinking about the two major political parties in the US, it is easy to summarize in my opinion the right or conservative party as loyal to religion as long as it is Christianity, money or businesses (one in the same), and dedicated to people as long as it just means them and their immediate family. The left or liberal party is dedicated to all religions, not just those you believe in, loyalty to the entire ecosystem and not just the businesses that run in them, and dedication to all people regardless of whether they’re in your family or look just like you. So does that mean all conservatives are evil? No, but there is this sense that they’re in it for themselves and not the greater good. It is like there is only one version of the truth, theirs, and all others are in valid.

So, if I was to simplify the two parties down even further in terms of motivation in the political world it would be that conservatives are out to win. They will do and say whatever to get their means to an end. Liberals are more interested in the problem solving. Liberals assume that if people are presented the facts that they will make the correct decision by using logic and intelligence to differentiate right and good from wrong and not in their best interest. Again, not saying that conservatives are some evil bunch, they just play the game to win and more to the point when making arguments are better at manipulating the audience. Peoples lives are complex enough with work, family, and all the other details of life. Critical thinking is not something as a country we do well. It is not valued and more to the point not taught and emphasized enough in schools. We have lost our way in challenging ideology in complex ways. When Truth is bent slightly and we go with it.

This year has seen its fair share of untimely disasters. Tornado’s rocked the south in states like Alabama, Tennessee, the Carolina’s, etc. with damaged not seen in a long time. Flooding occurring around the same time happened up and down the Mississippi river with damage not seen in almost 20 years. And even though this disaster did not happen in North America, the Earth quake and relate Tsunami mentally affected American’s and called in to question what would happen if it had happened in North America. When disaster hits, the government is looked to save the day. Communities pitch in and business can play a part in helping but ultimately it is the government who is held accountable to bring about recovery. So how does that idea work in a small government mindset? When there is no budget for emergencies of this scale, where does the money come from? Some in congress wanted that approval tied to spending cuts in other areas but which areas? Defense or entitlements? And is it hypocritical to expect small government to play a large role?

My point in all of this is to call out those that want it both ways, small government when things are fine but large government when they need it in emergency situations. It is easy to oversimplify government spending. The experience that I have just budgeting one department leads me to believe that it is very complex process with a lot of moving parts. And for all the ideas that cutting off entitlement programs that benefit the poor (or whatever adjective you would use) would save a boat load of YOUR money remember that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Meaning sometimes you have to spend money to save money.

There is this idea that government is too big, that it needs to be shrunk. This is based on two ideas, lower taxes and that if given the chance people will do the right thing. I think it is pretty clear from our current situation that power, greed, and a lack of ‘doing what is best everyone and not just me’ is the prevailing thought. Government is here to do a couple basic things. Keep our world running in terms of roads, water, sewage, etc. and keep people honest (enforcement of laws). The former is more housekeeping than anything. If it snows throw some salt on the roads. The later is where inlays the rub and is a concept that people fail to realize. Laws are here to protect us…from us. That is people doing things that impacts other people in a negative way. My favorite was during the oil spill last spring where people who support big government also expected them to have some elaborate plan waiting to be put into motion to mitigate the incident. Disaster Planing takes a lot of time to create, train, test, and maintain…all of which equates to money and resources. You cannot have it both ways.

Laws are created from when someone did something so stupid and the resulting outrage was so great that the people empowered the government to put laws in place to prevent said stupidity from happening again. So deregulating or creating smaller government assumes that people will do the right thing (again) and that they can be trusted. History has shown this is never the case. It is always the few that rune it for the masses…but that is what rules and laws are there for, to keep the exceptions in line with the rule. We the normal people, we are the rule.

“…government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.” – The Gettysburg Address, Abraham Lincoln

Why do we have a government? To protect the people! But from what? You will answer that possibly two ways depending on your political views: All agree that the government was formed to protect the people from foreign powers, which at the time was the great European powers of the day but more specifically for our independence revolution and creation the English empire who were exploiting their power in order to obtain raw resources and wealth from us. The English were not the only ones pursuing the new worlds wealth of resources but at the time was the real pain in our rears. So long story short through conflict resolution (to put it simply) we created the United States to protect our land, our people, and our belief system which is documented in our Bill of Rights, Constitution, and other confusing documents.

All Americans regardless of ideology agree the government is here to protect our lands and protect our beliefs (at least the idea though the content is always up for debate). So let’s think about the role of government as it applies to protecting its people. What about the people? It is our people through our efforts and accomplishments that make this nation what it is. We give this nation its character, culture, and identity needed to complete the total package. So is the government here to protect all people or just those of likeminded beliefs and backgrounds? What is the scope of that protection?

As the United States of America is a democratically elected republic, the government reports ultimately to the people. In working for the people, it should be responsible to serve its people, all of its people regardless of their economic status, diversity, or beliefs. At least that is the concept.

What we have today is a government that is run and manipulated by power, driven and motivated by economical gain (money). To sugar coat it by saying lobbyist, special interests, and businesses are to blame only punishes the ‘users’ or ‘customers’ of the problem. It is a system that breads on greed, re-election, and cronyism. To some degree every government has this problem with manipulation but the trend and balance over the last decade has slowly slipping more towards money interests versus serving the people. Everyone sees it, no one does anything about it.

Ask yourself “what is the motivation?”, “what is the bigger picture?”, and “who gains from this?”. Does this issue or change in question benefit the people or the interests with the most money?

You cannot make everyone happy and it is the businesses and interests in the world the keep the lights on but it is the interests of the people that should also ALWAYS be considered and prioritized first in the end. There is give and take, an ebenflow of changes to America but as of late the balance is shifting radically towards those in power and those with the money.

A country can be many things but is nothing without its people.