Not Problem Solving 101
Not voting should be the last choice
I would like to begin a discussion about problem solving with a remark from my father many years ago. In looking back, I had little in common with him and I cannot recall anything in particular he said — with the exception of one remark when I was in my teens. He noted that life was about problems and solutions. I came to realize over time that this was not an uncommon assumption, but the terms problems and solutions are rather broad and don’t begin to address the multitudes of factors littering every version of “problem” and “solution.”
Problems are infinite. Therefore, generalizations and thus solutions can mean many things to us. Agreements become problematic. The common assumptions that all problems — and thus by definition all solutions — can be addressed and solved are contradicted by endless realities. This is why so many issues are actually difficult to resolve. Even those that appear to be successfully resolved are often found to be insufficient over time. Unforeseen complications, overly optimistic assumptions and unrealistic promises undermine expectations.
My father was not wrong per se, but problem solving is a combination of multiple talents being brought together. The rational sometimes meets the irrational, and the process becomes even more challenging. I rarely use a current circumstance to illustrate a topic, but I am making an acceptation here. My wife and I, as is often the case, have other couples as friends. One couple in particular is closer to us than others, and we talk about many things with them.
One topic that has come up is the presidential election in November of this year (2024). My wife and I are voting for the female candidate. The other couple loathes the Republican candidate (with very good reasons) even though they are somewhat conservative. They are not inclined to vote for the candidate that we are voting for. One of the couple, the wife, is considering voting for a third party candidate. This, to me and my wife, is a pointless alternative.
Third party candidates are not rational choices in national elections, for many reasons. They may represent an alternative, but they are doomed to a very small percentage of votes. In some countries there are multiple alternative political parties, and these use affiliations among them to acquire sufficient votes. The stabilities of these combinations vary considerable, and the result can be increased numbers of elections. In countries with two primary political parties, there is much greater stability, although two opposing parties can still reek havoc.
The reality is that voting comes down to two candidates. If the candidate for one party is truly loathsome, and the Republican candidate this year truly is, then voting for the opposing candidate is always a viable alternative. Not voting only benefits the loathsome candidate, and voting for a third party candidate is equivalent to not voting. Sometimes it might seem that not voting is the only rational choice, but that should rarely be the best option for any voter in a democracy.
Democracies are the only viable form of governance for the greater good. Voting is the basis for any democracy. Not voting should therefore be the last choice. In regards to this particular election, it’s about time this country had a female president. Women bring qualities to organizations that few man have. That said, please vote for her. The alternative is far worse in every way.
