Can Anybody Govern?

Now that we have once again stepped back from the Federal Apocalypse, perhaps we can reflect a bit on "Conflict Resolution 101."

1.  Every position makes sense from the "inside" of that position.  People who hold positions on issues are doing so because such actions further their self interests.  We might attribute mental illness or instability to the other party, but unless there is an actual diagnosis, that sort of thinking is counterproductive.  I am more likely to make headway with my opponent if I assume that my opponent has a reasonable amount of rationality.  Then I might be able to understand the other position and make some progress toward a solution.

2.  Positions are not the same as interests.  Positions must be defended at all costs, and a change in position is very difficult to accomplish.  Interests are often hidden beneath the public positions.  For example, the opposing sides have positions on health care, debt ceilings, etc.  The real interest of many of the politicians was simply to send a message to constituents who really pay the bills come election time.  When the pain of the unresolved conflict began to outweigh the advantages of pursuing self-interest, then a solution was achieved.

3.  The spotlight makes deal-making nearly impossible.  We are suspicious--with good reason--of "back room" deals.  But very few real deals get made in the "front room."  Most deals are like sausage.  We might like most of the final product.  But it is not nearly as tasty if we know what actually goes into it.  When we insist that deals are made in the full glare of the public limelight, we will get bad deals.  When politicians are making such deals in the full public view, they are not interested in good deals.  They are interested in pleasing specific interest groups.

4.  When common ground does not exist, then it is time to seek higher ground.  Mediation is often described as the process of finding common ground--mutual self-interests that can lead to resolution of the dispute.  Often such common ground does not exist.  Then the disputants must find some higher principle or larger framework in order to resolve the issue.  In some of my mediation work that higher ground is "the best interests of the children" or "the mission of the gospel."  In the recent federal crisis, no higher ground was ever sought, much less found.  Thus our leaders continue in their inability to govern.

5.  You can be right or you can be happy.  In real life, you can rarely be both.  We finite humans do not have access to the one perspective on life that solves every issue.  We are not divine, no matter how often we act that way.  The sooner our leaders abandon their ideological idolatry and focus on the practical business of governing, the better off we will all be.  Government is indeed the art of the possible.  We who select our leaders need to demand productivity rather than purity.

6.  Winning is for suckers.  Winning may make a difference in games or in warfare.  I hope that most of life is neither.  Real life is lived in the middle, where compromise is the only real victory.  Making concessions to one another is the definition of progress in conflict resolution.  It is not the description of failure.

This is a democracy.  We get the government we demand.  Will we demand better?