Common Sense 2.0

Practical wisdom or judgement. That's the Oxford American Dictionary definition of common sense. These are also known in my classroom simply as the blue dictionaries, which are used quite often by my history students. I believe that it's common sense that if you want to teach kids how to be better and functional members of society, you need to expose them to terms and phrases that they need to get along in life, which is why I do alot of vocabulary work in my classes. The state standards don't necessarily mention using vocabulary to teach students, but then the state standards were developed by government bureaucrats, and when was the last time anyone in the direct employ of the government used practical wisdom or judgement?

Common Sense was also the title of a highly influential pamphlet produced by Thomas Paine in January of 1776, at the height of the American Revolution, and only months before the Declaration of Independence was produced. Basically, it argued that the American people should declare themselves independent from the British and their imperial rule, and it called out things like hereditary kingship and taxation levied from 3000 miles away as lacking in common sense. The arguement could be made that we still have plenty of both at work today, namely the Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton (potentially) era, and the fact that Washington, D.C. is nearly 3000 miles away from Phoenix, yet continues to collect most of my tax dollars. But that is not the point of this rambling, the point is, or as Kevin Nealy would have said, what I'm really trying to say, is this. We need more common sense in our society today, in our politics and policy, in our relations with each other and with the rest of the world.

Let's start with the Iraq war. Forget the issue of whether we should have gone in in the first place, or how the war has been managed, those are both questions that most practitioners of common sense have long since agreed upon. Does it make sense to gradually withdraw troops while leaving those left behind in the lurch? It's already incredibily dangerous for the troops we have patrolling the streets everyday, so what's the solution of the newly minted Democratic Congress? To make it even more dangerous by removing a large percentage of our troops. Not to mention what happens to the spirit and morale of those left behind. Common sense dictates that we either pull all of our troops out immediately, my personal choice, or that we commit to the troops that are there by sending in an overwhelming level of reinforcements. Neither the gradual withdrawl strategy of the Reid-Pelosi camp, nor the troop surge strategy of the Bush-McCain camp passes the common sense test in this case, yet those are the options that seem to be realistically on the table at this point in time.

How about the important issue of immigration reform? Does it make sense to put all of our focus on securing our borders, thereby ignoring the plight of the millions of undocumented migrants that are, and have been living in our society, mostly as productive and law abiding members, for years if not generations? Does it make sense to grant blanket forgiveness to those who did enter our country illegally, thereby sending the message to the countless millions that are contemplating following in their footsteps that there really are no consequences for breaking the laws? Does it make sense to focus on the poor workers standing on the street corner, or in front of Home Depot looking for work, while turning a blind eye to the rich corporations and individuals that continue to employ, and often exploit the most vulnerable, and often hardest working members of our society? What does make sense is for true comprehensive reform, that would address all of the issues immediately, allowing those in the country a realistic chance to become citizens and full members of their society, while taking steps to prevent those not yet here from entering illegally, and going after the employers that benefit from the whole broken system.

And in the interest of keeping this at five paragraphs or less, I'll finish with this. Does it make sense to continue to support a two party system of democracy that is based on division and disunity, and supported by two failed philosophies, conservatism and liberalism? Does it make sense to continue with an electoral system where the ideas take a backseat to the amount of money raised? Does it make sense to continue to support a federal government that has proven time and again that it is incompetent at best, and corrupt and immoral at worst? What would Thomas Paine say about all of this? That's all I've got for today, in the words of the immortal, and make-believe, Frank Bartels and Ed Jaymes, thank you for your support. And as always, I'll try to do better the next time.