As each side bordering the political chasm digs in ever deeper to engage in skirmishes whose intensities and potential consequences seem to have no end point in sight, we should be wondering with greater urgency what sort of "community" will emerge from the wreckage

::::::::

The moral difference is clear: Do we have both personal and social responsibility, or just personal responsibility? Are we in this together, or are we on our own? The conservatives say we are, and should be, on our own. Are we the United States or the Separate States -- or millions of isolated individuals who don't care about anybody else?
The answer to these questions affects every issue.

As each side bordering the political chasm digs in ever deeper to engage in skirmishes whose intensities and potential consequences seem to have no end point in sight, we should be wondering with greater urgency what sort of "community" will emerge from the wreckage. How are we preparing ourselves to pursue opportunities and provide for the well-being of our families when so much energy is dissipated in battles where nonsense is the primary weapon?

The current Presidential campaign--most notably the seemingly endless supply of outrageous [and embarrassing] nonsense coughed up by the GOP candidates--is but the latest in an escalating pattern of conflict by combatants actually seeking to fulfill many of the same objectives.

Assuming the future still matters to at least most of us, perhaps a momentary pause to consider where current choices will lead is called for....Ignoring legitimate real-world challenges by deflecting the facts courtesy of inane commentary; denying the facts exist to begin with, or making other absurd, ignorant claims to defend unconscionable political tactics and policy proposals will not affect the arrival of those problems in the least.

Discrimination against fellow citizens whose personal choices are absolutely no one else's business aren't exactly setting us on a peaceful and mutually cooperative path. Widespread impacts from self-induced harm will be following close behind. Do we continue the ideological battles, or decide to meet the challenges by cooperating as needed? Can we stop pandering to those narrow-minded and poorly-informed cultural objectives long enough to ask where the hell will we all wind up if we keep doing more of the same?

That there's no chance whatsoever of gaining ground in any meaningful way seems to be routinely overlooked. So too do these battles offer nothing but the creation of more problems for us all in the years to come.

Pursuing other options might be worth at least considering, if not trying them out for size. What we're all doing isn't exactly the ideal model for Problem-Solving 101. That there are serious challenges facing us all in the years ahead is not in dispute. Solving them in some acceptable manner as a prelude to doing even more is open to question.

In our highly-charged, more-complex-by-the-minute 21st Century, the competing interests, values, principles, ideals, ideologies, preferences and a score of other equally vital considerations [and far too many irrelevant ones] all compete for prominence in the public debates--or what passes for them. Peeling back at least some of the many layers so that an increased awareness and understanding might be added to the mix certainly can't hurt!

This multi-week series is an effort to expand awareness and understanding, which will hopefully lead to even more of those same objectives. The alternative is the continued pursuit of partisan disputes growing uglier and less fruitful by the day. We have choices. It's my hope this series will shed some light on at least some of those options. It might even persuade a few of us to test drive some new approaches to make our individual and collective lives a bit better.

Idealistic of course. But that's not a reason not to try....

Adapted from a blog post of mine

Authors Website: http://richardturcotte.com/

Authors Bio:

Looking Left and Right: Inspiring Different Ideas, Envisioning Better Tomorrows

I remain a firm believer in late U.S. Senator Paul Wellstone's observation that "We all do better when we all do better." That objective might be worth pursuing more diligently."

If we don't look for ways to tamp down the vitriol and intense hatred which members of Left and Right teams freely direct at "the opposition," we will not only foreclose whatever options might still remain to find common ground that moves us all forward. Worse still, we will eliminate both the hopes for and attainment of a better and more peaceful future. We're too close to achieving that empty triumph as it is.

We might not want to acknowledge that we're all in this together, but we are. The sooner we pause for a moment and ask ourselves What Happens Then? if we continue to stoke the white-hot partisan fires, the sooner we realize that sustaining polarization is not in the best interests of anyone.

If we keep doing more of the same partisan same, the answer to What Happens Then? won't be to anyone's liking--not that current antipathy is offering us much. It's actually not contributing anything other than deepening the divide. There will be harsher consequences from doing more of the same.

Aren't we better than that? Shouldn't we want, expect, and deserve more?

There's plenty of blame to go around, of course. But we're no closer to one side winning--whatever that might mean--than we ever have. Partisans on each side might not (or might not want to) believe that, but if Left or Right is counting on Right or Left to concede, a long and painful wait is all that's guaranteed.

Sure as hell we won't experience "better" by doing more of what we're doing now".So I'm hoping to do my part by offering--from my staunchly progressive approach--a different and more meaningful perspective on our conflicted public dialogue. I invite you to join in. Who knows " we just might get to a better place after all!

Richard Turcotte is a retired attorney and former financial adviser (among other professional detours) and now a writer.