Here’s a common sentiment:
This country needs to be inspired--and my dad is very impressed by Obama. He believes that Obama has the grasp of the history of this country that is absolutely necessary in order to lead us out of the MANY messes we're in. It really doesn't matter to me how right a plan is for health care, ending the war in Iraq, whatever. If our Pres is divisive and threatening to almost half of this nation and much of the rest of the world, we will not even begin to solve the problems facing us. I am looking for a unifier.
I have five observations:
1. Democracy Is Necessarily Divisive
Since it is about limiting choices of people, democracy always excludes the choices of the minorities by imposing the majority's opinion on everyone. If government is involved, the democratic choice that results is imposed by force on everyone. To be honest, the idea of democratic decision making is to vote on an issue so that we can force everyone accept one choice. We protect free and open debate so that supposedly we can allow the best solution to emerge. So political debate always exposes irreconcilable differences among people. The more issues there are that are important, the more "divisiveness" there will be. To blame a leader for being divisive is really to expose the problem of too much democracy and government power.
2. Principles Unite
Our unifiers are not people but those deeper principles that we almost all agree upon—freedom and justice—equal rights under the law; freedom of religion; freedom of speech; republican, constitutional government with separation of powers; and at one time, agreement to keep government out of our affairs by limiting it to only those powers expressly given it, namely the powers (police, courts, armed forces, etc.) necessary to protect citizens. Principles unite us but political issues divide us because they are about limiting our choices. Political issues are proposed government actions and therefore make the climate divisive because they involve government. Leaving things up to the free choices of citizens without government involvement keeps things from becoming divisive. So, for example, public education is divisive at every level since it is controlled by democratic processes that impose single choices on everyone—but in religion we have relative harmony since people can chose freely among many choices. When we try to restrict people's choices by using democracy, we create divisiveness in deciding whose choice is to prevail.
3. If Democracy Is To Work, It Must Be Constitutionally Limited
No candidate today could probably be elected on such principles of government because people mistakenly believe we need "strong leadership" and "creative" government solutions for "our problems." But strong government and leadership—the thinking that turns things into problems and then public issues for government and leaders to solve—is what leads us into difficulties both foreign and domestic. Previous government actions, e.g. in health care, are what create problems which political leaders use to justify more government solutions. Since we have unlimited government, the political process promotes politicians who pander to voters and misconceptions about government and economics. The solution is to limit government action, not to promote more government solutions.
4. Limiting Government in Foreign Affairs
Our government should be just as limited in foreign affairs as it is in domestic. It should be limited to protecting our country, not trying to create democracies. Some, not all, see a moral logic that generates a response to evil. Iraq should trigger thought about what to do about evil in the world, and secondarily, how constitutional limitations should work in controlling government actions.
5. A Solution for Citizen Voting
We might find a long term solution if we think more deeply about how choose among candidates based on their theory of government. If Democracy is to work successfully in the long run, it must be limited to electing people who understand what functions are proper for government and how government restricts or promotes the constructive solutions of free activity. Turning something into a political "issue" so that it becomes a "problem" government must solve may well appeal to many voters and get policiticans elected but it is also what creates divisive politics and more problems which then need to be "solved" by "strong leadership."
If we are to be responsible citizens, we must not choose politicans on how well they try to sell their leadership, their personal qualitiesor their government programs.
We must choose politicians on the basis of their understanding of government in particular, the American form of republican government, and how and why it limits government power.
The fundamental principle is that it is the constructive power of free human activity that builds a society, not government engineering.
