Mark Twain once said, “Collect the facts quickly and then distort them at your leisure.” An essential in making proper decisions is the former and avoiding the latter. So often the temptation is to bend the facts to conform to a pre-conceived notion; that will invariably lead to a less than optimal result. It takes real courage to change one’s opinion in the face of new information but holding on to an opinion that ignores new data is a sure recipe for failure.
How do we, the average person, get our information? It is sometimes at the end of a long line of filters, the most important of which are the media. To become wed to one source or even several with the same ideology will rarely give a balanced view. Too often we listen to and read sources that are in concert with our beliefs and, having done so, then feel quite justified in loudly defending a position that we feel has been validated.
This is not to say that we should not have strongly held opinions and stand by them, but before reaching such a conclusion it is mandatory to listen . . . really listen . . . to contrarian views. The Rush Limbaugh world may be compelling but it generally uses self-reinforcing arguments rather than looking dispassionately at the other side of the question.
Nowhere is this more in evidence than in the world of politics. There have been few times that partisanship has been so rampant but it is certainly not a new phenomenon. How easy it is to take sides and hold on with tenacity that defies reason.
In the realm of political affairs when we do that as individuals, it is helpful to realize that those in power are operating from a vast store of data to which we do not have access. That doesn’t mean they will make a decision that suits us, or even the best one, but it surely means they have the information that will enable them to work through the problem.
To insure that it is the best decision may not be possible but one would hope that it will be the least bad one. Few, indeed, are the times when there is a clear cut right or wrong choice but the solution often lies in an admixture of the two. To reach that happy decision point requires, after careful listening, compromise. In the world of Washington, that is an art rarely practiced, but little understood by the public.
In reading about the inner workings of the federal government there are a number of books that show throughout the history of our country how difficult this process has been. We tend to look back from the vantage point of the present and lose sight of the ferocious battles that were fought and the courage the leaders of both parties exhibited to get the best result.
One of the most illuminating is Presidential Courage: Brave Leaders and How They Changed America, by Michael Beschloss. He outlines the conflicts of nine Presidents (Washington, John Adams, Jackson, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, Kennedy, Truman, and Reagan) and how they made terrifically difficult decisions that changed the direction of our history for the better.
If you are looking for something more current about the convoluted process of national decision making, read Robert Gates’ Duty. In his role as Secretary of Defense under two Presidents of different parties, one gets an important view from the inside of information gathering that never gets reported in the press. Gates also shows that an important part of the process is speaking with candor to the President even though it may not be what he wants to hear.
Such reading may tweak the appetite for a broader serving of the art of compromise and that is readily available. High on the list of how much conflict preceded the courage of the final conviction is well demonstrated in a number of books. Founding Brothers and American Sphinx by Joseph Ellis, American Lion by Jon Meacham, Team of Rivals, Franklin and Eleanor, and The Bully Pulpit, all by Doris Kearns Goodwin, will leave you with jaw-dropping amazement at what all these Presidents, their Cabinets, and Congress went through to arrive at a consensus.
By becoming acquainted with the courage involved in these decision makers we should all be suspicious of those who rant about their view being the only correct one. There must always be honest questioning associated with intelligent listening. Both are frequently in short supply in individual discourse as well as in the affairs of the nation.
Hayden Hollingsworth
