Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69
Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70
Bob Henline strikes again, but this time there is nothing he said that I would argue with.
. . . all we end up doing is enacting more ridiculous laws that only spin the problems, never really resulting in any tangible effects. That leads us to ask the question of why this is the case?
The short answer to this question is that we lack anything resembling long-term thinking in this country. Our politicians have shelf-lives of 2, 4, or 6 years and our general public has an attention spam of about 12 seconds. This situation doesn’t lend itself well to long-term solutions, but it does lead to amazing long-term problems. Over the course of the past 50 years or so we have done an amazing job of creating problems and of pushing them off onto future generations. The problem that we now face is that we are the future generation that is stuck with the tab.
Politicians have short shelf lives – they view things within the context of terms – make the solution within their limited term and the only requirement is that the solution must move the problem outside the limited scope of the current term. They may talk about longer terms but they act within that short framework. Notice that this same type of short-term “anything for quarterly or annual profits in order to drive my bonus” mentality among bankers (often among those who were not even at the very top) was a major factor that drove us to the verge of financial ruin. Those we were used to calling investors had generally become nothing more than speculators.
In contrast to politicians, statesmen are defined as those who look ahead to the lasting effects of their actions. They work very hard to craft something that will be around longer than they could ever hope to live. The statesmen who founded our nation produced something that has survived (in a battered form) for over two centuries. Our politicians today do nothing that will not be tweaked, altered, or overhauled within 15 years.
Here is how I describe the daunting job that real statesmen in our day must undertake – they must be willing to sacrifice two, four, or six years at a time with no promise of being re-elected for their efforts, willing to roll back the band-aids of the past to uncover the real problems and apply real solutions regardless of how popular they are (committed to work very hard to help the rest of the people understand why they are making those tough choices), willing to live with potentially a lifetime of being misunderstood for the actions that were necessary for their probably very short term in office.
Can anyone honestly say that they are willing to take on that job description – willing to enter politics (which is naturally a very bruising enterprise as I said earlier) with the willingness to go one-and-done if people fail to recognize the true value of their work?
6 replies on “Re-Founding Requires Renewed Statesmanship”
Therein lies the problem, David. Our system is set up to reward failure in the guise of success, i.e. delaying the problem until beyond the next election. Do we have such people in our midst today? That I can’t say.
It’s easy for guys like you and I to blog about this and to delineate areas in which those tough choices must be made, but we aren’t in a position to cast those difficult votes in Congress. I’d be willing to do it, but honestly can’t see how someone that so openly espouses such thoughts would ever stand a chance in an election.
I guess that people like us – people who recognize these perverse incentives in the system – will need to do what we can so that those who would be willing to cast the difficult votes could actually get elected (one after another considering that they would have a good chance of being replaced each cycle based on constituents taking a short-term view).
Like you I would be perfectly willing to go make those tough calls – accepting a single term or any other ignominy that might come from misunderstandings – but I am not willing to run a campaign unless I think there is some chance that people would vote for me.
The Founding Fathers understood the idea of sacrifice and statesmanship. They also clearly understood the incredibly self-serving nature of man. They created an opportunity for true liberty; however, that precarious liberty rested on the People to take their responsibility to manage those who are elected and are ultimately changed by the toxic culture they work in.
I’d vote for you David–of course, I would need ACORN to get my vote properly cast in Utah from Nevada–but, I think a more fundamental need is to figure out how to get your’s and Bob’s viewpoint heard across a broader range of people. Right now, I believe that more people need to be contacting their representatives more often. Blogging may seem somewhat a minor contribution, but I think you are selling yourselves short. I think that the more and more this is discussed in blogs and letters to the editors and letters to representatives, the more and more the representatives will be held accountable.
I also beleive there needs to be greater integrity from the media (yes, I may be smoking something illegal to expect such a change). Nonetheless, such media integrity is critical to holding these folks accountable. It may be an incredibly daunting responsibility, but if we think that we are not making contributions through these discussions we will lose hope. Having and sharing these blogs and thoughts is empowering to people who may have otherwise thought they were the only ones who had these thoughts, feelings and attitudes.
I can only speak for myself here (in other words I am not trying to put words into Bob’s mouth), but I don’t think I am selling myself short by saying that what I am doing as a blogger is less than I wish to be doing – that’s not a statement about blogs lacking value so much as an admission that there is more that I would like to be doing. I’d like to be able to reach a larger audience on a consistent basis.
Agreed! I too wish there was a way for your viewpoints and thoughts to reach a broader audience. You would have a tremendous positive effect on people.
Agreed! And in no way did I want to imply that your efforts are not useful or productive. I think your blogs are very important to those of us who read them and discuss matters here. I just didn’t want you to think what you are doing is not important–because it is!
I think alot of people would be significantly better informed if your ideas and attitudes could reach a far wider realm of influence.