Hustle vs Bustle

There come moments when busy-ness doesn’t overshadow purpose but spotlights the need to re-invigorate purpose. 

For example, news programs (radio and TV) and internet news coverage hype how unsettled some communities are with their police services, especially as they interact with diverse cultural groups. Police insensitivity, or police bullying, or? The ‘or’ becomes important to think about. Is the community self-aware of its own cultural movement and sensitivities? Are they expecting more from their community than what they are receiving? And if so, are they active partners within the community so their perspective becomes known?

I don’t wish to downplay the seriousness of the police/community relations issues; it is a real issue. Both sides, in my opinion, have a lot of work to do. But that is a two-way street. Civilian community leaders (business, church, cultural, etc.) need to build bridges to the rest of the community and its leadership structures. Political leadership (city, village, police, taxing bodies, etc.) need to step up and learn the fine points of what is going on. Private/public organizations in each community can do much to understand what is going on and what reformative action would help ease tensions.

Is there unrest, civil protests and a rise in petty vandalism and graffiti? Maybe we treat these as a sign that something needs to be done that involves diverse parties working together.

To me this makes good sense. To others it is a spur to be angry and react. On the one hand we have an opportunity to do something positive; on the other hand we have a threat to defend ourselves from. The latter is a negative. My experience informs me that not much good comes from negatives.

It is comparatively easier to focus on the positive and work toward common good. All it takes is a small flip in the way people think about elemental issues. They need to make that flip before mismanagement of the issues complicates them to the point of riots.

Having said all of that, I think we need to bring clear thinking to national and regional issue management as well. As we gaze on the lunacy of the pre-2016 presidential hopefuls and their jockeying for visibility, we are forced to think upon their personalities rather than their abilities. That’s not a good start! The issues are important, but some are trumped up for visibility purposes rather than erudite discussion of solutions. Setting the agenda of a nation or a state or region is serious business. It should rest upon facts and serious options for our attention and solution.

Not falling for political shenanigans is our first step. Trying to avoid the ‘comedy central entertainment value’ of the pre-2016 presidential campaigns is the second step. Yes, they are funny and ridiculous. But neither are they serious offerings of factual content. And that’s just the point that needs to be made.

Trump is not serious in his pursuit of the presidency (Thank God!). But neither are many of the other candidates. Perhaps their running is designed to enhance their potential to be considered as a vice presidential running mate, or a key political personage in a future presidential cabinet. Lindsay Graham strikes me as a non-serious presidential candidate; but he does strike me as someone who wants to play an inner role in a White House setting of some sort. I doubt his ability overall, but still; his current striving could be explained in this manner.

We could go down the list and review each candidate. But for now that would be a waste of time. Individually they offer the public very little cogent value. Even as a team they offer us very little for the future.

No, the current hustle is a bustle to distract us from what is really important. And that is our job as voters. Understand the issues first; candidates second. If the candidates are not talking about the issues that really matter, then they are not serious candidates for public office.

How well do you understand the issues? How many of the issues we face are our own? How many have a global role as well? And finally, how prepared do you think America is in dealing with any of these issues?

Then and only then are we able to weigh the relative value of politicians who think highly enough of themselves to push themselves forward on the political stage. It is our job to evaluate them on this basis. It is not our task to learn who will do the least damage. Such a task is an admission that our system of governance is failing us.

Adhere to facts and issues. Understand them. The candidates will become known easily enough thereafter, I think.

We have much to do in the coming months.

August 4, 2015