Monday, March 25, 2013

Citizen of the State

I've been experiencing that phenomenon where as soon as you learn something new, you see it everywhere.  Such has been the case with libertarianism.  I've recently been through (or rather begun) a crash course in this political ideology which is mostly diametrically opposed to mine.  Yet, unlike some neoconservative arguments, a lot of what my libertarian gurus have to say makes sense.

Gasp.  This has caused some ideological soul-searching on my part.  The timing is not coincidental, it never is.  The ten year anniversary of the start of the Iraq war has made us squeamish.  Obama is beginning his second term, and we're all noticing he's rather drone happy.  The Republicans are trying some re-branding.  We're looking at Syria and not sure what to say.  Iran is... still out there, and well, Israel remains our BFF.  Meanwhile, it's getting harder for us to verbalize our stake in the affairs of others, and we're running out of money to run out of.  This perfect storm of current events has me thinking about America's role in the world.  How can we stay safe?  How can we benefit ourselves?  How can we benefit others?  This last question is optional or irrelevant according to non-interventionists.  I, however, maintain that immense resources, capability, and relative wealth should be put to good use when necessary.  Humanitarian efforts should not be a byproduct of the reigning political ideology of the time but a fundamental human endeavor.  Just saying.

But I get it.  If government would just shrink to communal/regional entities we could keep our tax money.  We could let people do as they please as long as it doesn't harm others, and we could let the free market perform as it should.  Left to our own devices, we as citizens and consumers would be free to create what we need and come together as individuals to solve our own problems, locally.  Assuming everyone really does come together to look after one another (and this is a big assumption considering I don't currently know any of my neighbors), this sounds very nice.  Free individuals addressing problems they deem worthy of collective solutions can be effective and even loving.  The reverse is also true, and this scares me.  What happens when everyone retreats to their own gun-laden farms and everyone fends for themselves.  Are we really only as good as survival of the fittest?  I'm not the first nor the last to respond this way to the libertarian premise.  I should hope that should the federal government dissolve into the Washington granite in which it's housed, that private, innovate solutions would spring up to the benefit of all.  Still, I'm unconvinced.

I'm curious however, isn't government an expression of its people?  That eventually in our absolute liberty, we would decide to establish a few rules, maybe elect a leader or two.  Maybe we would want to engage with other countries, and so we'd send some representatives.  Aren't we just on an endpoint of a free society that has built up over the years?  Has it gotten beyond us; is that what we're asking?  I suppose the test is if popular will conflicts with legislation.  We see that with issues such as drugs and gay marriage.  But issues such as these are raised in public debate and eventually corrected.  The civil rights movement enjoyed a quicker pace thanks to government.  The much stickier issue is how to influence the policies that aren't up to the public.  What about foreign and security policy?  What's the popular will tell us about that?

Libertarian or not, liberal or not, I think now is a great time to have a sober look in the mirror.  If our national security strategy is costing us too much blood and too much treasure, that's a problem.  We need to be okay with entertaining debate that's previously been taboo.  We love our military members, but it's okay to question military involvement in places we can't connect to our national interests (not to mention thinking seriously about defense budget cuts). We think Israel is pretty great, but we can suggest policies they don't like if we think it will help.  We can ask our president to please write down his drone policy somewhere.  We've gotten ahead of ourselves.  I think that's the conclusion we come to when looking at our global reach.

I'm not about to shake my liberal ways just yet.  I don't object to a society who establishes rules and agrees to sacrifice for one another, even if mandated.  I do however, think we can do a better job at being the most reasoned, the most strategic, and the most charitable state in the room, and not just the most powerful.  My political leanings are under review to be sure, but as of now I don't object to the job of the state, just its performance.


Saturday, March 2, 2013

The Gatekeepers

Please check out my latest post on WIIS-Up: http://blog.wiisisrael.com/2013/03/the-gatekeepers/

This post was especially important to me, as I could combine some creative, idealistic thinking about the conflict with a reflection on Israeli internal security.  Both topics fascinate me to no end and warrant greater understanding despite their longevity.

You are welcome to comment on the post, or begin a discussion on the new WIIS-Up Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/WiisUp  Please visit and Like this page if you are interested in hearing more!