Let's resolve problems through consensus rather than by toeing the line to a particular ideology

..................................................................................................................................
Pragmatic politics
NorthJersey.com, November 18, 2013

Normally we don't debate the responses we receive to our editorials. We say something, then you say something, and the matter is dropped. But we're going to make an exception this time and rebut a reader's response to one of our recent editorials. We had asserted that we need to elect political moderates if we're to ever put a stop to the seemingly endless partisan bickering in Washington.

In a letter on this very page, a reader says he disagrees with that position, maintaining that moderate politicians are innately "wishy-washy." To that we'd say, "Politics is the art of the possible," a quote by (of all people) Germany's "Iron Chancellor" Otto von Bismarck.

Let's consider Abraham Lincoln, one of the moderates our reader derides. After all, Lincoln, a moderate Republican by 1860s standards, did not initially advocate for the complete abolition of slavery. Rather, he was a proponent of limiting slavery, a far more accommodating notion for his pro-slavery political opponents than the total destruction of their plantation system.

Lincoln, as a Libertarian may note, was a strict constitutionalist when it came to the issue of slavery. In Lincoln's view, slavery was an already-existing and unnecessary evil. But rather than completely try to overturn the existing system in the South, Lincoln respected the Constitution and could not justify the taking of "property" (slaves).

This is not a knock against our 16th president (one of our greatest presidents if not the greatest ever). He achieved greatness during the Civil War with his ability to juggle conflicting interests and harness the power of his political opponents as well as allies (who often disagreed amongst each other) to win the war that had been brought on by inflexibility.

But despite his pragmatism, Lincoln still had an iron core. There were lines that he would absolutely not cross. Let's get to the heart of the matter.

The opening lines of Lincoln's Gettysburg Address: "Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure."

That's the nub. Extreme positions are fine for moving the entire electoral scrum either Left or Right. But at the end of the day, someone has to govern a nation of more than 300 million individual souls. Some kind of compromise on civil liberties is necessary, or chaos results.

The question now is, "Can we long endure?" Lincoln was dealing with Civil War. Our problems these days are not quite as severe, but are perhaps just as vexing.

Trying to resolve problems through consensus rather than having to toe the line to a particular ideology seems a surer way to accomplish what's possible.
..................................................................................................................................