The difference between a national interest hungry American and an idealist American should be a great divide

That there is not a divide is fraught with political paths that can be ruinous to America. And all this is way beyond the two national political parties, which have had their chance and blew it. A national interest hungry American should come across as more like the Chinese we vilify, that is those who use every trick in their bag of tricks to promote themselves, their families, their business, their country, and their way of life. It is crude, straight forward, and they do have their own serious problems, lest we make them look too tall. An idealist American assumes as an only super power, again the operative word is “assumes”, our country can only be defeated militarily, and that is unlikely. Hence, there is not even competition both foreign and domestic, and some other more idealistic approach better ensures our national interest. Yet this path invites incremental dissolution of all the new world and American power earned by an ancestors.

For example, going to school and working hard still counts. New world American values and policies should promote this as a hard standard to be promoted, valued, recognized, rewarded, and awarded. So many from the third world recognize this (thank goodness), and we should, too. This idea of a hard standard goes against the thrust of “everybody’s a winner for showing up”, taking dodge ball out of recess, etc., that has been promoted in policies and practices during the last few decades. Even double standards to promote Negroes is counter productive, unfair, and racist in the long run. A hard standard is national hungry interest at its best, especially given our world competition. And in our new world amalgamation, we can win hands down, with some leadership and voted policy. And our elected government employees must work hard in this direction, both foreign and domestically.

The other side of the divide that should exist is those Americans who expect to succeed by leadership by example, as in the golden rule type foreign and even domestic policies eventually get their just rewards. Double standards and even affirmative action come to mind as how these idealistic policies get applied. Some Americans even are willing to fritter away all the advantages our ancestors passed to us in pursuit of their objectives. There is little thinking about even balancing out practicality with idealism. Even our politicians can tie our business and even CIA people’s hands behind their backs. As an instrument of foreign policy I understand. As an instrument of idealism it is much too idealistic and naïve in this most human and rough world.

In this is the rub. Some Americans are not willing to let other Americans take them down the tubes of history. Said another way, the tolerance for do gooders and good intentions is down if it means American children and grandchildren are to suffer and take the brunt of failed American idealism. There are other alternatives, and other better ways, even in the world we live in today.

That the divide, the chasm, is not so deep suggests the vote is a good way to decide our country’s future. All Americans can accept this idea of a vote. After all the alternatives are civil war or revolution. And the alternatives are “American” vice either present national political party's agenda today. Hence we Americans should see new names pop up nationally (and after the first of the year) in the 2008 federal elections. I have mine, you have yours, and let’s see what sorts out. The most important American names are at the state and local level. We Americans will not have to vote to take back America, rather we will vote to be America. But by golly, vote.