I just got a call asking me political questions. It got me thinking....What would I do? And what do I believe?
The question made me question whether I would govern on a practical/utilitarian model or a principled/deontological model. I don't know.
Certain principles must be adhered to, if we want to protect a Constitutional government. One cannot get too practical without compromising and undermining the basics. But, what are those basics? Are they ideologically driven, or pragmatically negotiated?
Because of such quandaries, I wonder if we are judging some of our politicians, too harshly. Compromise is a necessity if one is to get anything done. Our Founders balanced power for this very reason. They wanted to protect our government from abuses of power. And such is a necessity if we continue to remain free.
What drives me and what concerns me most? What drives or concerns you most?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
Sound like you don't know much of anthing.
Bye Bye
Thanks for stopping by, and I'm sorry that you haven't "connected" here.
You are correct. I make the statement here, that I don't know what I would do, because I would want to make a difference, I just don't know how efficient and effectual "freshmen" are, but at least I am thinking about it and trying to learn about it.
Before any action, there must be a reflection about why you choose to do what you do and believe what you believe. Otherwise, one is going to be led by others, instead of leading themselves by thier own principles. This is what happens many times with our legislation now, as the people in Congress pass bills that have not even been read, much less reflected upon. And that is much of the reason we are in the fix we are today.
I think it would be helpful for our representatives to have term limits and be elected on a rotating basis, so there are always "senior" members. This way, Congress is not a place to make a "bed", but a passing through to give service for a short time.
Angie, obviously anonymous is a false patriot. Your questions and your willingness to enter a questioning posture in the first place, is certainly behind the people who dared to invent America.
I think you'll find this link interesting:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2010/11/01/130980120/the-american-experiment
Mike (I sign my "John Hancock" to the things I write).
Thanks, Mike.
Historical versus Experimental, hmmm...
That scares me a little because without an understanding of the past and a commitment to "Founding principles", then we are bound to experiment ourselves "off the map". Some might just think that America as a nation-state would be better off, as the world would not be "limited by a super-power".
But, I haven't seen this same mind-set toward China, for instance (say, with the Cap and Trade). And those multiculturalists always defend the right of Iran and Palestine to their view of history. Granted I adhere to perspectivism to some extent. But, I am not a liberal in regards to Constitutional boundaries, as it concerns our nation/citzens.
And besides our own historical foundations, if we do not take history as a warning, then we are bound to make the same mistakes and do the same "evils"...
Post a Comment