Are you an Interventionist or a Non-Interventionist?

Some days a light goes on in your had and you begin to see things in a different way. Today is one of those days. For too long we have argued over who someone is politically. The Democrats say they are doing what's best for the country, while Republicans and libertarians say the same. Sometimes we get so wrapped up in a party that we forget to think. There is a simple solution.

We are all interventionist or non-interventionist. It doesn't matter if it's social politics or foreign events, the terms can be applied. Can it be this cut and dry? Can we be an interventionist on something and a non-interventionist on others? Remember the age old adage, “Mind your own business.” Our ancestors have passed those wise words along through the ages. The non-interventionist is simply the same thing.

The interventionist uses the power of government to do their bidding. They don't want other people to eat certain foods so they elect people who are also interventionist. Interventionist believe most people aren't capable of self governance. There are some people who are, and will always be, dependent on others. Even a non-interventionist believes in helping those who ask for help. The interventionist doesn't wait for them to ask for help, but forces help on those in need as well as those who aren't.

Some of us have been looking for a way to bring like minded people together, but find that difficult because of labels and misguided perceptions. I find that I agree with Democrats on many of the problems. We even occasionally agree on the best solution. It's because of labels that we cannot find enough common ground on which to effectively work, even though all political persuasions agree that government is broke.

In the end, it comes down to those who want more government and those who want less. There are those who believe government is more efficient than private industry, while others see the opposite. No matter if it's government or private interest, I think most can agree that we don't want them in our lives. We don't want government or business intervening in our lives. Because we can agree on this, we find that Democrat, Republican, and libertarian can be non-interventionists.

lib·er·al

1. open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values.

"they have more liberal views toward marriage and divorce than some people"(of education) concerned 2. mainly with broadening a person's general knowledge and experience, rather than with technical or professional training.

con·serv·a·tive

1. holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation, typically in relation to politics or religion.

2. a person who is averse to change and holds to traditional values and attitudes, typically in relation to politics.

re·pub·li·can

1. (of a form of government, constitution, etc.) belonging to, or characteristic of a republic.

advocating or supporting republican government.

"the republican movement"

2. a person advocating or supporting republican government.


lib·er·tar·i·an

1. an adherent of libertarianism.

"libertarian philosophy"

a person who advocates civil liberty.

2. Philosophy: a person who believes in the doctrine of free will.


pro·gres·sive
1. happening or developing gradually or in stages; proceeding step by step.

"a progressive decline in popularity"

2. (of a group, person, or idea) favoring or implementing social reform or new, liberal ideas.

"a relatively progressive governor"

3. a person advocating or implementing social reform or new, liberal ideas.

synonyms: innovator, reformer, reformist, liberal, libertarian More

Above are all the defined political terms. At first look, we might say they point out the differences, but I see many similarities. For example, no one wants the country to not grow economically. Everyone wants it to move forward. I remember learning about the founders and how the liberals were for building the republic and wanting a free populous. Look at John Locke who founded liberalism, yet today, there is a conservative leaning foundation for which he is named.

Labels and their meanings have changed over the decades. Those with socialist and communist beliefs have hijacked some labels and parties. That's why we might be simplifying things by simply looking at everything in two ways, interventionist or non-interventionist. Which are you?

Update 12/20/18

For some reason when I first wrote this I omitted military action. That is an area where ideologies often differ. The decision often made isn't if the United States should be an interventionist, but when. Democrats complained when the US took action in Iraq after the 9/11 attack, while Republicans complained when Democrats attacked Libya.

Maybe both ideologies should look at it as to when should the US intervene in another country's affairs, whether it be through warfare or political action. There are often undesirable, and not always unexpected, affects to these actions. Because Bush chose to take out Saddam Hussein, who no one would say was a good guy, we saw terrorist groups run rampant over the country. Even though Saddam was a bad guy, he kept Islamic extremists in check.

It isn't America's job or right to decide who should be running another country. If that country attacks us or our allies, then we should defend ourselves. But we should never invade another country unless asked by the legitimate government. If a majority of nations decide as a group to fight against some injustice, that's a different matter. The United States of American should never be an interventionist.