Why politics won't solve our problems

Politics consists of a type of thinking I will call warrior centric thinking.   Example: Obama seems to think that all of his problems are with the other guys.  Other examples: class warfare and the like, which is something the left wingers like Obama like so much.  If only all the wealth of the rich were taxed away, we'd all go to heaven.  Right.

The so-called right wing will just start a war.  Whack all the foreigners and our troubles are over.  Yes, it works the other way too.  If we only got rid of all the liberals, everything would be much better.  Well, maybe, but I'm not so sure.  Bush had his chance after 9/11.  Americans were put off by the liberalism and were more open to a conservative message.  What did Bush do with it?  He turned the entire country off to conservatism and we ended up with a hard left President.

There may be yet another shift to the right with the next election.  This country is turning into a ping-pong ball.  But we can't do big stuff anymore.

We need warriors, but we don't need that warrior centric type of attitude you get from the politicians.  The warrior centric attitude thinks that to solve any problem, just get rid of the other guy.  You end up attacking each other as opposed to attacking a problem.  The warrior centric attitude doesn't solve any problems.  It just might do the opposite.  It just might make you less capable of solving the problem that you seem to care about so much.

Take the space program as an example:   There seems to be a conflict between SLS & Commercial space.  Each seems to want to wipe the other out.  What they are doing is fighting over a limited budget.  If SLS gets more, Commercial space gets less, and vice versa.

How does this solve problems when you want to get to space?  By the way, you can take this to a more generic discussion and come to the same conclusion---it isn't just space.

There needs to be a better way.

You have to look at the value of the other side before you can accept them and work with them.

The argument against that assertion is that it is too idealistic---too "kumbaya".  The world really doesn't work that way, some might say.  Yeah, it doesn't.  But sometimes, you can get people on the same page long enough and you can see what can be done.  The Apollo program during the sixties is one example of how the space program could really work if you got everybody on the same page for just one decade.

With regard to the SLS and Commercial space---  If it doesn't get resolved properly, there may not be a US space program anymore.  Some in government are already talking about ending manned space flight.

What's the value of SLS?  I think of it as an insurance policy.  Some way or another, you are going to need a way to space---somebody has got to do it.  That means somebody has got to be around who can do it.  If commercial space goes out of business, what then?  Therefore, government is a more secure entity.  It's going to be around in one way or another as long as there are people around.  No mission for SLS?  Make one!

What is the value of commercial space?  Innovation and agility.  We need newer, cheaper and better ways of doing things in space.  Big government and big business isn't too good at that.  We need that in order to make progress.  After 50 years of big government in space, we can't do what we could do in the early sixties---get a man into orbit.

You don't have to wipe out the other guy.  There's room in Dodge City for the both of you.