Process Matters pt. 3: Politics

Valuing outcomes over process is nothing new in the realm of politics. Ever since Machiavelli penned "The Prince," the concept of "the ends justify the means" has been in place. Certainly that principle has been on display over the centuries when we look at tyrants who use any means necessary to secure their ends, whether that be Lenin and the Russian Revolution or Mao with the Chinese "Cultural Revolution."

Surely though, in America, a nation steeped in the process of the Constitution, this attitude couldn't creep in....could it? It has and continues to be an issue in American politics. The desire to bring about political ends even if it means a Constitutional "end around" has unfortunately become part of our naton's fabric.

We can go back to the Civil War era to see this principle first at work. No one will argue that ending slavery was the moral thing to do. What can be argued and continues to be the subject of debate is the method taken. The Civil War was a direct result of a Constitutional crisis created by legislators who threw process to the wind and tried to enforce results on unwilling participants. This prompted the secession of the Southern states and the resulting five year period of bloodshed. Following the war, needing to pay off massive debt, a confiscatory income tax was adopted, again shortcutting the priciples of protecting private property for the pursuit of a short term gain. That began the inevitable growth of the Federal government to the point today where our founders would barely recognize what they had put together.

The past month has seen a heated debate over Federal health care. Again, we see a noble goal being reached through means of a shortcut. This is completely unsurprising, given President Obama's discipleship to Saul Alinsky, and his "Rules for Radicals." If Machiavelli wrote the gameplan of how the "haves" could protect themselves from the "have nots" by hook or crook, Alinsky wrote the "Bizarro Prince," a tract that instructs "radicals" to achieve "social justice" by any means necessary.

What we see as a result is what we've always seen: instead of citizens getting behind a social movement and helping their fellow citizens, the disregard of process has lead to a feeling of disenfranchisement which breeds resentment and anger. We should be unsurprised to see "Tea Party" movements developing when process is being sacrificed for outcomes. If we look back at our Revolutionary roots, few Americans were in favor of rebelling against Great Britain. They considered themselves British by birth and were not just engaging in a fit of pique against their "parent" country. Even a cursory reading of the Declaration of Independence shows a people frustrated by failed attempts to engage the British in a peaceful process and continued resentment by a government which was regularly circumventing process in order to gain short term goals.

Similarly, few, if any Americans would argue that health care is unimportant or that the current system needs fixing. Contrary to the demonizers in the media, those who oppose this measure are not "racists," or "uncaring." In fact, research shows clearly that conservatives are in fact a very charitable group. What we're seeing is the same anger and resentment we've seen everywhere when process is sacrificed for outcomes.

Just like in sports and education, American government desperately needs to return to a system which respects the processes outlined in the Constitution. Our nation's leaders, on both sides of the aisle, need to reject measures that shortcut the Constitution, no matter how desireable the goal is.