Political philosophy versus “perversion” of the philosophy via the actual act of governing is fascinating.
From a philosophical perspective, I love both the ideas of Marxism (core belief that one’s labor should not exceed that which is necessary to produce the goods he/she consumes) and Libertarianism (emphasis on indiv. liberty generally with the goal of minimizing or abolishing government).
Of course these philosophies are more complex and involved than this, and many over the years have presented their views within the framework of these two core idea resulting in many philosophical branches.
Both Marxism and Libertarianism are nice ideas, but neither work in reality once the historic evidence of human nature is truly considered. So, the question becomes….how do peoples and nations effectively implement political ideas in practice?
There are also, of course, many branches of “liberal” philosophy and once society-based contextual considerations along with mud slinging from the other side come into play, lord only knows what we are actually talking about.
So, I think that I am going to start my own political party called The Common Sense Party (unfortunately for me, my definition of common sense does not jive with everyone else). The following would be the party’s core platform positions (of course, like any politician, the details of these positions will only be revealed once I am elected):
• “Fair” capitalism is the ideal practical market structure. People have to have incentive to better themselves and advance or many/most of use would revert to our naturally lazy selves. However, laissez-faire capitalism results in wealth and power being concentrated into the hands of very few. The “lower rungs” of society at that point do not have a fair opportunity for advancement as the rules of the game are decidedly stacked against them.
Rules of the “market” have to be created and adjusted as the market and society adjusts to preserve as much fairness and opportunity for all as possible. Markets are not natural entities, like oxygen, as some “free-market” advocates seem to imply. Markets are man-made structures (big games really) and the rules of the game need to be created, adjusted and tweaked as makes sense given market/game conditions and as new ways of beating the game are innovated by various individuals and organizations. Capitalism does encourage innovation both good and bad. New technologies, products, services and advancements are often, although not always, good. Capitalism also inspires other forms of innovation—besting/rigging the system and other expressions of creativity.
Governments, comprised of elected and appointed officials are the only organizations that can logically be held responsible for enacting/changing rules (laws) to control the markets. Governments, as they are comprised of human beings, often go too far one way or the other resulting in the fundamental necessity for a changing of the guards—elections.
• A healthcare system in which people go broke trying to take care of themselves and their families (especially within a country as rich at the United States) is absurd. A healthcare system that has become so expensive that more and more people are unable to access the system is equally absurd. A healthcare system that stifles innovation is not best for long term progress. The magic question—where is the balance? France’s healthcare system offers some interesting ideas that should be considered. The British and Canadian systems have very real problems and we need to work to not repeat their mistakes.
• Access to quality education (pre-K thru advanced degrees) is vital to a successful society. Our public school systems, on whole, are broken. Public universities have gotten so expensive that we are excluding more of our citizens from participation. Both public school systems and public universities need to be both better funded and better managed. Throwing more and more money as inefficiently run organizations (which both public schools and public universities are often very inefficiently run) is not the answer. More money and better management has to be achieved simultaneously.
• Taxation policies need to be fair. To improve overall services to our society (healthcare and education to name two big ones) taxes will likely have to increase. However, taxation policies cannot be so stifling that they snuff out innovation and willingness for people to “give it a shot.” If taxes are too high, there is no/limited incentive for people to work hard to advance themselves and society.
• Helping hand up—not long term hand outs. I fully support government subsidized daycare for those who need it, government funded adult education/career repurposing programs, quality affordable education (as mentioned above), etc. However, if citizens are not willing to work and take advantage of these programs/opportunities…if they are not willing to remove their rear ends from the couch and turn off American Idol…they can rot for all I care. There are too many Americans with out of date skill sets and education—something has to be done about this.
• Protecting worker rights is critical. No one should be treated unfairly or work in excessively dangerous conditions. However, many of the labor unions are out of control. They have gotten as greedy and as self-interested as any poorly managed company. American workers are/will continue to pay a very steep price for this. Labor unions should have an important place in today’s world, but they need to make a 180 degree adjustment to their approaches in order to productively help/protect American workers.
• As a reasonable and compassionate society, social safety nets are important—unemployment insurance, social security, welfare programs of various sorts, etc. However, these programs can get out of control. No one in a country as rich as ours should starve or be denied core necessities and core services. Some citizens are just not able to support themselves—handicapped people, disabled people, etc. These people need to be taken care of. However, able-bodied people need to earn their own supper. Incentives for able-bodied people to tap into welfare and other social safety nets long-term cannot exist. Education and job skill training may be necessary in many cases (see above). In addition, many of us fall onto temporary hard times. There needs to be social safety nets for these situations via some of the above mentioned programs.
• We must take better care of our environment/planet. Cap and trade systems and other forced mechanisms are necessary because we are certainly not taking care of our planet under the current systems. Real recycling programs should be mandated. Currently, the higher oil/crude prices are the more incentive the market has to recycle. When oil/crude prices fall, there is disincentive. These practices are killing our planet. Our planet cannot count on us doing what is right as the result of our own free will—clearly we are not doing the right things and we have had plenty of opportunity to make the right choices.
• People owning unnecessary Hummers should be shot at dawn. Few, if any people I know in mainstream American society, need to own a Hummer.
• Social legislation (abortion, gay marriage, etc.) should, for the most part, follow a Sandra Day O’Connor populist model. When the fringes of society (either ultra conservative or ultra liberal) jam their views through the system, a society has very real problems on its hands. You can’t push a society too hard, too fast. You can’t try to hold it back either.
• Our Constitution is a brilliant document and needs to be respected. However, our Constitution, I believe, was designed to be a living document. Constitutional literalists, on whole, are using their “literal” arguments to jam ultra conservative views down the throats of the American people.
• We must respect the views, desires and cultures of other nations. American as a global bully will only continue to exasperate problems.
• We need a strong military, but not a military that mushrooms for no reason. Our military might is a last resort tool—must be used in full force at times (WWII), must not be used for needless and inhumane slaughter (Iraq).
• The religious and moral views of all people need to be respected. The separation of church and state is not an issue than can be compromised—for the good of both the state and the church.
• The Common Sense Party respects the vital and necessary role of government. However, our governments need to focus on doing for the people what they cannot do for themselves. The government should focus on activities that the private sector is not very good at doing. For instance, the private sector is profit driven. Potential profit that is too far down the road or is too small compared to the risk is not a path that the private sector will or should take. The government should have been aggressively funding alternative energy research for decades now—we could have avoided a lot of death and destruction. The private sector, with low oil prices, had no/little incentive until recently. Rapid oil consumption is killing our planet and is a very real national security risk. The role of government should be to step into situations like this—no/little profit in sight for the private sector, but the good of the people is at stake.
• The Common Sense Party embraces fair and productive globalization. However, raping less developed countries for their cheap labor is bad for the people of the world and is bad for Americans.
• Fiscal responsibility is necessary. At times, the government needs to deficit spend (to do for people what they cannot do for themselves). Times of economic crisis, times of necessary war are two cases in point. However, we cannot in good times and in bad spend money like mad and continue to lower taxes. Already, five full months of tax collection (Jan-May) goes to service our national debts. I am sure that the latest (necessary) stimulus spending will tack a couple of months onto this. We are approaching the debt practices of third-world nations. Eventually social services have to be cut sharply because tax dollars go largely to servicing the nation’s debt. Granted, we are fairly far from the numerous Latin American and other countries that essentially starve(d) their people to service their debts—but it could happen if we are not more responsible.
Government's Role: Protect the People From Themselves
The Peoples Role: Protect the People the Government--especially a government gone mad (e.g. the last eight years)
So, given The Common Sense Party platform—do you think we have a shot in 2012? On second thought, the last thing I want it to be elected for anything. I am perfectly happy to let President Obama continue to take a run at fixing the mess we are in.
