Common Ground Consensus Essay

Politics' function is to serve men, not to serve ideals. Ideals should move politics forward and direct policies, but not dictate the day-to-day work of political life. It is important to differentiate between ideals and common ground consensus. Ideals are what fuel individual's plans and desires, but in a democracy it should be common ground or reasonable concensus that should be applied for government policies. When common ground is reached, ironically ideally, the best of the different ideals would be incorporated on government policies. On the other hand, a gridlock of power could occur, as we have seen in the US in the last decade. A balance should be found for the best of the opposing ideals to be implemented while avoiding paralysis in the government because of the impossibility to reach a …show more content…
For instance, in the United States Governement in the last decade congress and the house of representative has halted to a stop constantly being involved in a gridlock. Trying to find consensus could be argued is part of the culprit for the most innefective congress in the history of the United States. With innefective, I mean the last couple of congresses have not been able to pass mostly any laws. What it is important to remember is that consensus doesn't mean overrepresentation. The problem with consensus is that the party who is underrepresented be it in the congress or senate want to have equal footing on their ideals that the party that is currently in control. In an ideal world, the ideas would have a weighted representation. However, this is not possible. For this a different mindset has to take hold of the representative of the goverment where a fair discussion should take preponderance and the country's advancenment should be the priority. In other words, political parties should always put country over