Thursday, October 29, 2015

Clashes of Interests and Positive Middle Path

There are two kinds of conflicts that take place at the political level. One is the clash of values; the other is clash of interests. In debates such as ones surrounding death penalty, drugs and abortion, the clash is that of values. In matters concerning business and labor, or men and women, or technology and environment, the clash is that of interests.

It makes sense to approach these two kinds of conflicts in two different ways. With clashes of values, the solution is to have the right values and stand by them. With clashes of interests, the solution is to respect both interests and work with both interests to create solutions that work for the benefit of each side.

In the clashes of interests therefore, I advocate what I call the positive middle path. I do not just mean moderation, as middle can be found in any number of undesirable or unsatisfactory places. An example of this is if the middle between business and labor is found in labor over-regulating business and in business being terrible to the labor. I advocate the positive middle path, and that means:

Finding out what each interest wants;
Support what is legitimate;
Confront what is not legitimate;
And get them to negotiate solutions that work for both sides.

In all cases in politics, the interests involved are capable of both right and wrong. Both business and labor can do the right thing, and both business and labor can do the wrong thing. Business can produce prosperity; it is also capable of short-sighted, destructive and brainless practices such as burning the rainforest or flooding the atmosphere with CO2. And labor can also do both right and wrong, in some cases working hard and producing prosperity and in other cases prevailing upon other workers to not work harder than themselves.

With interests therefore, it is a matter of figuring out what they are right about and what they are wrong about. And then it is a matter of combining the sides in such a way that makes the best of – and achieves best results for – both. Neither business nor labor are good or evil; both are capable of each.

Of course we see the same thing with men and women. Both have always existed, and both have always been capable of the good and the bad. This is because of choice. Anything that has capacity of choice has the capacity for doing right and for doing wrong; and we have always seen – and will always see – the same in both men and women. It makes no sense to be either for men or for women. It makes sense to be for good women and for good men.

While a case can be made that compromising based on values is evil, compromise among interests is what I consider true good. Both sides are affirmed as legitimate, and what is legitimate in each is supported while potentials for malfeasance are checked. That way the best is made of all participants in the political system, and a benign and harmonious arrangement is cultivated where all interests are honored and learn how to work together to make a better world.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home