Discernment is the act of exercising keen insight and good judgment. In other words…know what you can, understand the parameters and the consequences, and make the best choice possible. True discernment does not necessarily mean that one makes the choice that yields the most favorable outcome. The favorable path may be immoral, unethical or perhaps illegal. The best choice, therefore, may not be the one with the greatest yield. Bernie Madoff chose to engage in an enterprise that initially reaped high returns for his clients and him, but ultimately led to most of his customers losing their entire investments. In addition, Bernie now sits in an eight by twelve cell, and his family apparently loathes him (or it’s a ruse to minimize their liability).
One of the more popular slogans for those engaging in complex difficult tasks is “don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.” In other words if the goal can be generally achieved with a reasonable outcome, take it and move on. Do not allow your quest for perfection mire you into a fruitless, time-consuming effort when you could be moving on to other tasks or objectives. Discerning decision making is having the judgment to understand when “good” is good enough….additional time and talent will not significantly appreciate the value of the outcome. This column is not intended to be an esoteric exercise in decision making. I leave that to Robert Ringer, Stephen Covey and John Maxwell. This column is a follow-up of sorts to an earlier one (“What is your vision?”, 10-26-2011, www.littlestuff-minoosha.blogspot.com). In the previous column I urged you to identify and solidify what your vision for the nation would be if you had the power to implement it. If you cherish and respect the Founding and Framing documents, your vision can be defined more quickly, but getting from “here” to “there” requires a whole lot of vision, work and persistence.
Picking perfect priorities is a method for transitioning from vision to action. As we stated in the earlier column, the vision will establish the parameters for identifying candidates or issues that are consistent with the end result we desire. Reality often intervenes, however, so it becomes necessary to prioritize the qualities or attributes that we believe are essential for earning our support. Earlier I stated that I value constitutional fidelity based on principle, integrity and humility. You, on the other hand, may have different priorities. You may prefer tenacity, pragmatism or collegiality as your over-arching attributes for restoring our Founding ideals. With your vision defined you can choose the attributes that are most likely to lead toward your visionary goal for the country, and choose the people and issues that most closely match your template.
These two columns in tandem are not intended to be a sum total definition of the process for choosing whom or what to support in the governing and electoral processes. Just as a frame is not a house, these columns are not an action plan. A house does need a solid frame to be structurally worthy, and I believe that we need more than slogans, vague objectives and partisan rhetoric to achieve our goals and save our Republic. In the last election cycle, for example, Tea Party and affiliated groups elected 83 or 84 Republican members of the United States House of Representatives. Yet when the first major vote- raising the debt ceiling- was cast, more than 60 of those freshly-minted Representatives abandoned the overwhelming will of the people who elected them. Why? I believe that we failed to insist on strong constitutionalism from our candidates. “Smaller government” is not necessarily “constitutional government.” Our vision and our priorities were not definitive enough to truly identify candidates who shared our passion….or who were “lukewarm” and in “general agreement” with our objectives. We allowed the “apparent” good to supersede the quest for perfect, and we settled for weak unprincipled poseurs. The outcome, so far, has been disappointing, but as we more clearly define our expectations and do not allow ourselves to be stampeded into strictly partisan boxes, we can be more effective in vetting and identifying those who truly share our vision and our priorities.
The final column in this mini-series will be “Raveling.” We’ll attempt to design a framework for undoing the “unraveling” of the United States of America. See the “vision,” identify the “priorities,” and implement the “raveling” can be a formula for restoration. We must have a plan, and we cannot rely on a party establishment or leadership to share our values. They work unceasingly for power, and we should always labor for liberty. These are not complementary or compatible values.
Comment: cearlwriting@hotmail.com
This week: Mon., 6-7:00pm, 1370 WSPD, Toledo www.wspd.com
No comments:
Post a Comment