Too Many Chefs in The Kitchen

Does no one understand how our representative form of government works?  I’m reminded of the old saying “Too many cooks spoil the soup.”  We’ve got too many people who think its their job to do the cooking and no one understanding what the recipe is.

In my town the city council recently passed a controversial program where council districts could propose sites meeting specific criteria on which to establish legal homeless encampments.  The intent is to create limited, contained spaces that would protect the homeless and as well as any surrounding area and would provide needed social services to the homeless.

This is a new program, just passed, and details are still being discussed.  No sites have been proposed.  The resolution promises that citizens will be made aware of any proposed sites and have the opportunity to comment before the site is confirmed or removed from the proposal.

Nonetheless, there are protests already when, for example, a group of citizens hears a rumor about a proposed location.   Citizens think they should know every site that anyone is even remotely being considered.  They want to see every draft of the proposal as it is written.  And they want all this now. They protest without any actual facts or any reason for the protest other than that they just don’t like the ordinance and think they must know about every breath their council-person takes.  Not only is this disruptive, it also tends to overshadow or eliminate any actual and productive discussion on this issue.

This is just a small example of typical reactions to governmental processes, yet it reflects two important problems that are threatening our democracy.

         1.   Lack of understanding of representative democracy and the people’s role in it. 

Ours is not a pure (direct) democracy in which each and every person has a direct say and in which, as a result, the majority or loudest voice always prevails.  Rather, ours is a representative democracy in which the people hold the power but exercise it through their elected representatives.  

Our government is defined as a Democratic Republic because it operates on principles of both democracy and republics.  It is democratic in that the power ultimately belongs to the people (though exercised by those they elect) and republican because it includes certain rights that are inalienable (not subject to overrule by the majority) and protected by a document such as a constitution, creating rule by law rather than by pure majority.

In such a system, the people must understand their responsibility to select and elect wise individuals who will represent them, and then they must trust those individuals to carry out the daily operations of governing which the people have entrusted to them and elected them to carry out responsibility.  That means that the individuals are not directly involved in every act and every decision made by their elected voices.

And yet we often have the people wanting to look over the shoulders of their representatives, commenting on every keystroke on the computer, commenting not only on drafts and works in progress but even on ideas that are nothing more than part of a brainstorming and compromising process. 

This is not a problem in government alone.  Today everyone seems to think that they are experts in everything and are reluctant to leave the real experts to do their jobs.  The difference is that in governmental duties, if we think that our representatives are not up to the task, we the people can replace them and that is how we fix it if they cannot do their jobs.  We do not jump in thinking we will do their jobs for them.

This interference in the work of the elected officials is not what is meant by government of/for/by the people.  Rather, the people’s input is first and foremost at the time they cast their vote, and beyond that, as to specific governmental functions and processes, they will include specified times and manners for input from the electorate to their elected representative.  Moreover, the people are always free to provide input to their elected officials in any number of ways including phone calls, texts, emails, letters, letters to editors, peaceful protests, etc.

To put it bluntly, the people need to wisely elect, and then let those they elected do their work.  The people need to pay attention to what those they elected do, so that if dissatisfied they can elect someone else in the future, but the people cannot actually butt in and themselves do the work they have assigned to their elected representatives. 

         2.  The unrealistic need for immediacy combined with a belief that each person is entitled to have their way

The citizenry have to allow the processes to work, understanding that for a well-reasoned and rational government there needs to be time to think and not simply react.  And, the citizenry also must understand that because this is a democracy where all and often diverse voices are heard, they will not always get all that they want and indeed at times may be fully disappointed at the outcome of the process.

Yet, we have many in this country who become hysterical at even the thought that things won’t go their way, who demand immediate and favorable to them action on their cause.  And if such immediate gratification is not forthcoming they do not wait for the wheels of government and the democratic process to turn; rather, they in one way or another try to blow it up.

Take the recent SCOTUS leak of a draft opinion possibly overturning Roe v. Wade.  A DRAFT opinion.  In the Court, as with most governmental offices, documents go through several drafts before being finalized and the final document may have little if any resemblance to the initial draft. 

Yet even the thought of Roe v. Wade being overturned sent people and advocacy groups and the press and even the Administration into such a tizzy that not only were many pro-life offices and organizations bombed and hit with other terror attacks, but demonstrators went in violation of federal law to the homes of Justices to protest and one person has now been charged with attempted murder of a Justice.  All because of a first draft that may or may not become reality and a need to immediately demand consolation and retribution for a decision that does not yet exist that is displeasing to those reacting so immaturely to it.

This is not a problem of just one political party (though currently it seems to be the only operative reaction of Democrats who raised it to an art form inciting hysteria over almost every word and even perceived thought of then President Trump).  But we must acknowledge that both sides do jump to conclusions based on rumor and innuendo and then demand that there be some fix for that which has not even yet occurred. 

This is not healthy for several reasons.  First, jumping to unfounded conclusions and then reacting emotionally and sometimes violently is incredibly destructive.  It denies any opportunity to calmly and rationally view an issue, discuss any number of ways of resolving it, and then working to find a solution that addresses concerns of all sides on the issue. 

It also denies the ability to resolve an issue based on actual facts rather than rumor, perception, innuendo and emotion.  When people take positions based on irrational and unfounded beliefs, it is hard to retract and later find common ground.   There are no well thought out objections or discussions, but simply people essentially yelling either “yes” or “no” and demanding they get their way regardless of reason, thought, or possible compromise.  It is really an adult form of infantile name calling and bullying and is in no way productive.

            We need to review and reset our roles in this government of ours.

Everyone in this country, citizens and elected officials alike, need to go back and review our form of government. 

We the people need to understand the importance of our vote, because it is that vote that determines how our voice will be represented.  We need to keep current on what our elected officials are doing and use the processes available to us to voice our opinions to them.

The elected representatives also need to review and understand what their job is.  It is to represent the voice of their electorate – to speak for those who elected them – and not to simply plow forward with their own agenda regardless of the wishes of their constituents. 

Right now we have too many chefs in the kitchen.  The people’s representatives cook the meal, but it must be the meal that their constituents have elected them to cook.  And if the meal is to be edible, then the people must let the chefs they have chosen cook that meal using the recipe given them by the people without nit-picky interference from the people.

And everyone needs to understand that doing it right takes time.  Good laws, regulations, decisions take time to consider the facts and the consequences of various actions.   Interference in government, if done without understanding, can do more harm than good.

Vocal protest is useful to a point, but citizens must understand that in our form of democracy you don’t just keep screaming until you get your way.  A protest expresses the deep passion about an issue by a group of people and it can be a way of telling elected representatives how that group feels.   But resolution of the issue requires more than passion.  It requires time and reason - two things that seem to be lost right now and with them the functionality of our democracy.

“I will not become a racist to prove that I am not one” and other short thoughts on current events

Yesterday I read the story of a police officer comforting a Black 5-year-old who asked if he were going to shoot her.  This anecdote was being used to demonstrate the horror of “institutionalized racism.”  I was horrified – horrified that this child had learned this fear at such a young age.  And who, I ask, likely instilled that fear in her – her parents or other caregivers?

So, I must wonder, can all the blame for hatred go to those whom the victims claim hate them, or might some of it fall on the victims themselves?  For if a child at the tender age of 5 has been taught that police are likely to shoot her, what else has she been taught about those who are not members of her racial victim class?  How much of that is actually true or justifies a fear against a whole group?  With that fear the seeds of hate are also planted. 

And, how can we ever come together and be one nation if one group of us (whether that group is Black, White, or other) is teaching fear and hate rather than love and reconciliation against another group.  No wonder BLM and its partner M4BL (Movement for Black Lives) make demands on those whom they perceive as victimizers rather that reaching out to work with those others together to make a better world.

**

People say they want conversations, but it seems that what that really involves is dueling studies.  That is, each side will have their studies and statistics that “prove” their points and with those in hand seem to close their mind to any real dialog about those studies or diverse views supported by alternate studies. 

One can always find a study or data point to support their position.  Using them as a sort of “in your face” to those with opposing or differing views does nothing to resolve divisions.  What actually might resolve hatred and division is urging others and opening one’s own mind to understand that we are all part of one humanity that can work together to make a better world.  But we will never do that if we focus on our divisions and feel some need to prove that our position is always absolutely right and all others are absolutely wrong.

**

There is a difference between peaceful, lawful protests intended to make a point relevant to policy and urge changes in policies that the demonstrators are against, as opposed to riots, or revolts, or revolutions that simply focus on destruction.  Those who say that all are the same are actually siding with those who favor complete destruction.  

Those who would take away all police power, all lawful authority are in the process of destroying our democracy.  We do not have a first amendment right to riot and destroy other people or their property; it is the duty of our law enforcement and our leaders to protect the citizenry from unlawful acts.  

If we cease to have a safe democratic state that can only lead to having instead a safe authoritarian state.  Such a state would not even allow the peaceful protests that are not only a part of but a necessary piece of our democracy.

**

Let’s say that we: clear the nation of all confederate statues; put a large chunk of money for “reparations” in every Black person’s pocket; make it illegal to use any terms, phrases, or express any feelings or beliefs that the Black protests/demands deem to be racist; defund and dismantle law enforcement; send millions of dollars to Black communities.  Will the rioters be happy then or will they continue to: teach their children to hate, especially those who look different or think differently than do they; blame anything that is not perfect in their lives on a problem with the “system”? 

Racism will only really be resolved when each and every one of us is willing and able to take individual responsibility for our lives and when we hold individuals rather than identity groups accountable for their bad acts.  Only when we are all equally outraged at the unjust treatment or murder of any person of any color will we actually have moved forward. 

**

Identity politics is in large part responsible for bringing us to this point.  For the past 50 years mostly Democrat leaders of areas with large Black populations (especially large cities) have, despite their promises, done little to help raise Black people to a better existence, but have instead used identity politics to convince the Black population of their victim status.  This was useful for those politicians who could then claim that this underclass needed them and hence would demand their votes to keep them in power. 

Their power required this underclass and, in the name of helping our neighbors, they encouraged all of us to help to create it.  We reinforced mantras such as “you are not good enough on your own”; “you can only go so far”; the Whites/rich/republican/[fill in the blank] are out to get you and you must fear them”; and of course “you need the state, things like welfare, to survive because you cannot do it on your own.” 

Messages such as that are far more racist than demanding that Blacks simply be accountable.  Those who listen to those messages will always be victims full of hate at their perceived oppressors and ready to serve as tools for anyone who wants to “revolt” against the “system” usually for their own power, not to help those whom they see as their tools.

**

Gratitude is a key to joy.  Being filled with envy and hate destroys joy.  It also destroys one’s self.  It destroys one’s ability for self-motivation – why be motivated if others are all against you and likely will not let you succeed?  Instead of being the one in charge of one’s own life, falling victim to identity politics allows others to control your life and indeed your very identity. 

**

I am being urged to buy from Black retailers and Black business owners in order to show my solidarity with the “fight against racism.”  Well, to seek out or award someone simply because of their color seems pretty racist to me.  I tend to think the best individual should always win based on skills necessary to the contest, not simply because of a color of skin.  When I want to buy something, I will purchase from the retailer that best suits my needs be that price, quality or variety of products offered, convenience and quality of service, etc.  That retailer may be Black, White, or purple.  I will not become a racist to prove that I am not one.