I once read an article critiquing Mr. Bush's apparent thinking regarding the war in Iraq. The article insightfully dissected a variety of issues surrounding the topic and concluded that in order to achieve the goals that were on the table regarding the democratization of the Middle East, it would possibly take sixty years. Clearly no American president would ask any current electorate to embrace such a long-term strategy in such a short-term political world.
Nearly twenty years ago, amidst the pains and uncertainty of the Cold War, I began a search within the Washington D.C. establishment to see if any serious group in those administrations had a long-term strategy to overcome the communist world. It was not an academic exercise for me because at the time I felt my own children's fate in this world was very much at stake.
As some would expect, I found no such long term strategy. I was assured, by someone who likely would know, that only "military contingencies" existed. No serious politicians thought in any other way, they said. A few think-tank organizations played with such long-term strategizing, but beyond that, there really was nobody home. My disillusionment four years into the search was so profound that in my D.C. hotel room I cried and pondered living in this fragile reality. I could only conclude that God alone among the "powerful people" thinks like that.
I am not saying that I believe Mr. Bush embarked on a sixty year strategic exercise. The author of the article was only saying that the President's policies carried with them the possibilities of a very long, sustained journey, if indeed the goal was to carry the Middle-Eastern Muslim world into a free and democratic society of cultural liberty. What I am saying is that I profoundly doubt the possibility of any major American politician ever suggesting such a line of thinking. Why? For two reasons: 1) Americans are short-term thinkers because the spirit of Americans is profoundly pragmatic and short-term; 2) because our four year electoral system does not permit a climate of long-term strategic thinking that transcends political parties and builds upon sustained applications of long-term goals. Our hope is in something new, coming out of our origins as, "The New World."
Since human beings are flawed, it may be a gift that such long-term policy applications don't exist. Maybe God is the only one permitted such luxuries. Certainly He is the only one who can control them. But I nevertheless wonder sometimes about China or Japan. Certainly China thinks very long-term and with a profound sense of historical continuity. We'll see. While the western world plays, the eastern world waits.
If Christianity is truly moving eastward, as the pundits say, so is the future. The future always has belonged to the ones preparing for it, and that is the bottom line.
Principle Based Evaluation: Every person and entity either follows the random chaos of just letting things happen or the practice of strategic thinking. The results of that choice are obvious.
For more information on the author, Dennis Peacocke, go to: http://www.gostrategic.org/
Ramah W
said:
 |
Long term Goals Long term goals must be made by everybody and in everything that you do. In order to be successful there must be goals that are made to keep a focus. When you go into a job interview people are looking for someone who know what they want to become and have a goal to live for. On one of the most popular hiring sites, monster.com, they mention how you must have long-term goals. (http://career-advice.monster.c...ticle.aspx) This will help your employer know that you are more than just short term focused. Focusing on just the now will affect your future. It is more than just the future that we must look to. The history will help us learn what will happen in the future. Those that look to the past can see what is the present’s future. Those that see that the people that set goals and act for more than the present become successful. If I was to just look to graduation then I wouldn’t have a future as a director which is what I want to be. Long term goals will set my focus on the right things and not just the now. Here is some more information on making long term goals: http://www.davekahle.com/article/goals.html |
Jessica Rankin
said:
 |
... Your comment that, "Americans are short-term thinkers because the spirit of Americans is profoundly pragmatic and short-term" rings even more true now than it did in the late 1900's during the Cold War. This mindset boomed in the 60's with the Woodstock, peace, love, rock-and-roll atmosphere that has forever changed the way American's think. Especially in the youth, there is a sense of apathy towards the future. No one plans ahead for their lives, the teen years are times to have fun and do what you want before the "responsibilities" of adulthood come crashing down. This is a main cause of many of the problems young adults have, they are ill-prepared for the world and what they are stepping into. The most well known representation of this is the fable of the ant and the grasshopper. The ant stores up food and prepares himself for the future, while the grasshopper wastes away his time. When the testing winter comes, it’s the prepared ant who survives. [1] There are two sides to this coin though. You can also get caught up being too focused on the future. Obama’s message of “Hope for the future” seemed to be too future-driven. There should be an equal balance of learning from our mistakes of the past and preparing for our futures that help us make our decisions today. The best example of this was Daniel. He knew the past in order to understand the present situations and interpret future decision courses he might encounter. Another more recent example of this was the American advisor to Russia after WWII, George F. Kennan. Kennan understood Russia’s history and saw its present state of Communism before many others. He used his knowledge to help President Eisenhower navigate through the Cold War successfully. In short, “Kennan derided Stalin’s concessions as fig leaves of democratic procedure to hide the nakedness of Stalinist dictatorship.” [2] Through his knowledge of the past, he helped America plan for a long-term goal of abolishing Communism. Now we find ourselves in un-certain times. But if there is one thing we can be certain of, it is that as Pastor Dennis said, the future belongs to those who prepare for it! [1] http://www.aesops-fables.org.u...hopper.htm [2] To read more about George Kennan, see these works Kennan, George F. --American Diplomacy: 1900-1950. --At a Century’s Ending. --The Fateful Alliance. Kissinger, Henry. --Diplomacy. |
Jeremiah Surface
said:
 |
Encouraging Visionaries Mr. Peacocke has hit on a critical point when he said that America is no longer thinking long term "because our four year electoral system does not permit a climate of long-term strategic thinking that transcends political parties and builds upon sustained applications of long-term goals" A prime example of this can be seen in Massachusetts, where in only a year after Barack Obama was sworn into office, he failed to help the Democrat candidate to garner enough support to win. This happened in the same state that Obama had carried in the presidential election by 26 percentage points. Some are now calling this the end of Obama's political hopes for healthcare reform and possibly reelection.(1) This coming only one year after he swept the country. In our current democracy people have become enthralled with what helps them today, rather than what is best in the long term. One Alexander Tytler successfully analyzed the problems in a democracy when he said, "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing."(2) For our Democracy this can be seen by the fickle way in which voters are raving about Republicans one minute and then Democrats the next, simply because they think that one candidate will bring themselves personal gain. Whatever happened on voting by principle, instead of a whim? Shouldn't we vote those who have a strategy that goes beyond tomorrow and considers the future of our children and grandchildren? 1. http://www.spiegel.de/internat...92,00.html 2. http://www.freerepublic.com/fo...2343/posts |
