UNIFYING THE UNITED STATES

UNIFYING THE UNITED STATES

.

A multiplicity of dreams is ripping the United States apart.  Without a common unifying dream, each individual group within the population reverts to forcing their own diverse dream, down the throat of their countrymen.  Unrestrained, this divisive tactic only accelerates the ever-widening gap.  If it is true that a house divided cannot stand, the lack of a unified strategy hastens the destruction of the United States of America.  Yet, there is dream buried within America that slumbers, unawakened.

.

Finding a suitable compromise between separate dreams is not a unifying strategy.  Compromise is a tactic used successfully to implement a single shared vision…a common dream.  The compromise tactic serves to achieve a single shared dream.  It satisfies everyone who holds a common dream by giving something, while denying something to accomplish that one single goal.  Replacing a unifying goal with one of the many varied dreams held by a diverse population, tears at the fabric of the United States.  A unification strategy is one that inspires a nation behind a common dream. 

.

Last winter I cited Abraham Lincoln’s quotation from Mark 3:23 to urge the cultivation of national unity.  The post did the opposite, igniting a long and contentious Facebook exchange.  A brief segment of that give-and-take exposes not only the divide, but reveals the desire for some unifying strategy.  As you read the tail-end of the argument, note the shared desire for a mutually acceptable uniting-principal, eluding both contestant “A” and “B.”

.

“A” Replied

MAYBE others cultivate it by posts against the president?

..

“B” Replied

I don't agree...as you know, I never attack Trump voters, because I understand the sentiment for the alternative, but Trump is now the leader and the President...it is HIS responsibility to help unify the country, not mine.  His speech on Saturday night merely fanned the flames of disunity…   Moreover, when he sends out a tweet on New Year's Eve (do you remember that one?) where he mocked those who didn't "vote for or support" him as being "among my many enemies," he reiterates his contempt for people like me... it's incumbent on him to win me over, not vice versa, and he continues to do the opposite. When he changes (which he shows no signs of doing), then I'll stop calling him out on FB.  

.

“A” Replied

(“A” posted a disapproving remark along with an agree emoji)

.

“B” Replied

Sorry “A”...I actually like him substantially less today than when he got elected, I tried to give him a chance but that New Year's Eve tweet set me off...and I assure you I'm not alone

 .

“ME” (Capt. John) Replied

It creates a "dammed if you do and dammed if you don't" conundrum.  If you say something, anything, you increase the destructive division; if you don't you allow the malicious onslaught to go unchecked.

.

“B” Replied

I think attacking Trump voters would be divisive, but calling out Trump on his divisive rhetoric, and holding him accountable as the key person who has responsibility for cultivating unity is another thing...and is good and right! … I am just doing to Trump what many did to Obama...seems pretty fair to me.

.

“ME” Replied

 Trunp voters are as passionate about their guy as we were, and still are, about ours. Now, they feel just as personally attacked as we did.  Yet, I do agree, it, "seems fair to me.".  The problem is attacking Trump just sends his supporters into defensive-mode, widening the division.  It will take cooler heads to find some uniting strategy…other than WAR…to draw the nation together.  If things don't come together, I predict that just before his reelection season, Trump will pick a fight with a nationally-perceived aggressor to improve his ratings.  Spun just right, nothing brings a nation together like a “just” war.  Watch and see.

.

“B” Replied

I don't doubt that, but Trump, and certain of his core voters, simply cannot expect folks to just shut up and consent...I have had folks say things like "get over it" and "we put up with Obama for 8 years...”  I'm not wired to sit still and "shut up" and "get over it" unless/until Trump stops his awful and inflammatory words and behavior.  Did you see his speech Saturday night?  ...and standing up to it does not promote disunity nearly as much as the rhetoric he perpetuates.  …mark my words, he will be impeached.  I'll take Pence over Trump any day.

.

“ME” Replied

One can only hope your tactic works.  It is a popular approach right now.  But, without a unifying strategy, no matter the party in power, these present divisive tactics will produce what Abraham Lincoln feared, "If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves."

.

“B” Replied

I'm afraid we may never be unified again, but shutting up and letting despotic power take hold isn't in me...remember the tea party movement?  That wasn't unifying, but it was successful.  I guess one approach is to be quiet and leave the voices and rhetoric to people like Rush Limbaugh and Alex Jones, but this is still America, and we have a long history of dissent leading to action… I remember a "voice" on one of your threads a while back, from an alleged former pastor, and that guy and his vitriol and Trump love is part of the problem, and I'm not going to let people like him fill the void that would be left by remaining quiet in an attempt toward unity.

.

Did you notice the desire for a unifying strategy?  Well, there is good news…American has one.  It is not protection, production, piety, prosperity, or purity.  These are objectives to support a central unifying national goal.  A national goal, we once called the American Dream.

.

 The dictionary defines the American Dream as, “The ideal that every US citizen should have an equal opportunity to achieve success and prosperity through hard work, determination, and initiative.”  In other words, The “American Dream” is our unifying goal, driving us toward the well-being of the every individual, family, and community that makes up these United States.  The problem is the objectives of protection, production, and prosperity, which support that dream, have replaced the nation’s historic unifying goal.  The result is not every citizen enjoys equal opportunity.  Worse still, treating a number of objectives as if they were essential goals, we fail to unite behind achieving the American Dream. 

.

Equal opportunity to work hard, achieve success, and prosper through determination and initiative requires a governmental system that supports the well-being of every citizen.  Devices such as, good infrastructure, environment, education, health, and safety are features of a government sustaining equal opportunity.  When a government neglects these, they weaken a nation’s unifying goal, spawning national division.  It has lost its sense of purpose.

.

Furthermore, directing our focus back on accomplishing our cultures primary mission, the American Dream, satisfies the longings of both the left and the right.  Our ancient national goal, the American Dream, fulfills the conservative yearning for the stability of the past, while granting progressives hope for the future.   

.

Instead of engaging in the controversies that always accompany the implementation of the means (objectives), we can change the direction of the country by focusing on our mutually held American Dream (the ends).  Redirecting our discussion toward our established national goal provides openings for civil discussions about the means to achieve the unifying goal.  The advancement of the uncontestable American Dream is the unifying strategy necessary to reduce if not closes our nation’s destructive division.  I pray the strategy occurs between individuals, across the net, and on all other media sources.  If this strategy does not work, we must follow a strategy similar to unification attempts of other nations: as presented below.

.

.

The Following are Excerpts from,

Wilson Franklin Brehmer, Bard College

A Study of National Unification

.

“Because atheistic Marxism Leninism serves as the national ideology of the Democratic Republic [East Germany], the division of church and state is nearly perfect.”62  Atheism grew in popularity in East Germany and the region still

possesses one of the most atheistic populations in the world.  By the time of unification in 1990, 36.3% of East Germans believed in God compared to 77.6% in West Germany.63  “In contrast to the churches in socialist East Germany, the churches in West Germany have extensively integrated themselves into

the democratic society.”  The East German policies regarding social-welfare were better than West Germany’s.

.

East Germans worked harder and longer for less which may have contributed to a desire for unification with the more attractive West German state.

.

The 1972 Basic Treaty, signed by East and West Germany, fully recognized both states and led to their acceptance into the UN.

.

 The 1974 World Cup saw East and West Germany play against each other in the first group stage.  East Germany won the match but West Germany would go on to win the World Cup.

.

The East (17 million) willingly submitted most of their institutions to the (61 million) more stable and successful West German state. - This allowed room for the desirable aspects of the submissive state's structure to be implemented if seen fit.

.

The success of Vietnamese and German unification where Yemen failed is very much rooted in Germany and Vietnam's lack of a balance of power.  Counter intuitively unification seems to be more successful when one of the unifying states submits or is forcefully dominated by the other during the unification process.  North and South Yemen went through the unification process as equal actors but suffered when in the post-unification period, North Yemen attempted to make the South subservient. 

.

 Should Korean unification be attempted, it will be interesting to see how the question is approached.  More than the cases in this paper, homogeneity is not present in Korea; economically, militarily, politically, culturally.  In addition, almost all of their interactions have been hostile.  Korean unification would be a very good test of many of the ideas put forth in this paper.  National unification

is a rare event and has only occurred a few times in the current context of the international system so there is still much to be learned from studies of this phenomenon.