In Praise of Foresight

Forgive me if I have used the following illustration before, but in the light of our current political situation it seems particularly germane.
As it happens, World War II came to an end just as I turned four. At the time, my family was on vacation in the Catskill Mountains. Coincident with this, my uncle Milton, who had recently returned home after having served with Patton’s army, came to spend the day with us.
Having never seen me before, he decided to take me for a walk down a country road. Concerned for my welfare, on several occasions he asked if I had grown tired and wished to return to the guesthouse where we were staying. Each time I replied that I was not and that we could keep going.
Eventually, however, I asked if we could turn around. At this, he once more inquired into whether I was tired and I again responded by telling him that I was not. But then I added that I would be by the time we got back.
My uncle was so impressed with my foresight that he subsequently told this tale many times. He was especially astonished that a child so young could think so clearly into the future. Today I am retelling this story because I am equally astonished by the degree to which adult voters are currently refusing to use foresight regarding the upcoming presidential election.
Let me begin with the Democrats. How is it possible that biologically adult human beings can fail to understand the implications of a national debt that threatens to reduce us to a large-scale version of Greece? With the example of the European financial meltdown before our eyes, how can voters ignore the potential consequences for our children and grandchildren?
Yet instead of reducing government expenditures, the Democrats have decided to engage in class warfare. In the hopes of getting reelected, they have decided that this short-term gain is worth courting long-term disaster. Even worse, they have decided to enrich themselves and their political allies while this catastrophe unfolds.
The Republicans, however, are little better. They may understand that payoffs to the unions, political contributors, and crony capitalists are a recipe for national bankruptcy, but they do not seem serious about replacing the current administration with a more responsible one.
Over the past several months we have witnessed numerous polls revealing an electorate that is operating more like a pack of lemmings than a collection of serious decision-makers. Instead of looking forward to determine who can best solve our shared problems, people have shifted their loyalty from one crowd favorite to another.
Today Newt Gingrich has surged to the head of the pack. People love his feisty debate performances, but why aren’t they thinking ahead to the sort of presidential candidate he would make, or, more importantly, the sort of president he would be?
While Newt makes a good showing against fellow Republicans when standing together on a common stage, what will happen if he shares this venue with Obama? Rest assured, Barack will take the gloves off. He won’t be reluctant to point out Gingrich’s flip-flops, or to condemn his lobbying efforts, or to impugn his character.
There is a reason that the president’s campaign managers would rather run against Newt than Mitt Romney. They, at least, have the sense to realize that Gingrich is vulnerable on many counts. A flawed human being and politician, Newt makes a tempting target—however much he declares his eagerness to mix-it-up in debate.
And as to his becoming president, here the past is the best predictor of the future. Don’t people remember how hated Newt was when he was Speaker of the House? Back then, just as now, he wrangled with reporters. The difference is that back then he did it virtually every day and that the reporters returned his contempt in kind.
Can you imagine this sort of contention if Gingrich gets elected? Not only would the electorate that put him in office soon come to loath him, but the wheels of government would quickly grind to a halt. With all of the in-fighting, there would be precious little problem solving—to the continued detriment of nation.
Gingrich may have big ideas, but if they are only verbal flourishes that are never translated into effective action, what good will they do us?
Melvyn L. Fein. Ph.D.
Professor of Sociology
Kennesaw State University