Political upheavel

It is interesting to see the start of the election campaign in Australia.  It is interesting to note that there is in reality no newness to the approaches to the campaign being made by any prospective politician.  It is also interesting to note the way people are approaching the coming election in terms of "wants".  I often find it ludicrous that when one political (party, individual, side) states the "we will give..." the opposite side says either "we will give more..." or "They cannot fund...".  I also find it amusing when various interest groups start to voice their needs, it is always "Yes, but it could have been more..." or "They did not give to us who are more deserving...".

Should we be divisive or  discerning in our politics?

Why is this rhetoric so amusing?  Yes, everyone should get everything how wonderful that would be but at the end of the day their is a limited amount of money, finance, will, etc. as any good manager knows.  What does not appear to happen, because it would destroy the competitiveness of the political scene, is any indication of good governance.  If corporations, Churches and NGOs where to be run like politics, what a laugh.  Who is it that the prospective government are going to be leading? Is this debacle for a grasp at power? of course!  Is it for the country's benefit? Doubtful.  Is it for the populace? what an incredible thought.  How could it possibly be for this or even for the benefit of the country?

What I would offer is a dream borne out of my faith journey, a dream borne out of the rigours of life, a dream that entails truth, compassion and peace.  Perhaps the next leader ought to look to their faith (if they have one, many profess one) and see what it says to them of how we treat our neighbours, the other.  This requires skill in negotiating, this requires acknowledging our own needs and placing them behind us, this requires listening and compassion, this requires action that is relevant and not a result of political power/want, this requires balancing the competing interests, this requires fairness to all, this requires understanding and admitting your wrong.  The list is endless and it means a re-think for our politicians as to how they act and for whom they act.  By all means follow a particular party but remember that you are being elected by people not by the party.  By all means accept party policies but challenge them openly when they do not conform with your belief systems and those you represent.  It also means not being divisive in how we approach our choices but use language and seek actions that move towards both / and rather than either / or

We need to change.  Life is about growth and about challenge that leads to change.  We cannot stay the same if we are to grow.  Look at a plant and you will see that it changes as it grows before dying. I wonder if there is any more growth in the various political parties or should they die as all living things eventually do.  It is only out of death that new life comes as our faith tells us.  Do we dare attempt new things that are borne out of our faith convictions or must be continue to struggle with stagnation?  I found fascinating two clips that surfaced on facebook both challenging for different reasons; the song by Bernard Fanning and the Three minutes of honest TV.  The three minutes clip, although probably staged, shows how misleading our own political rhetoric really is and that we actually need to think through what we are told very, very, carefully.  Most especially our preconceptions and accepted beliefs.  The Bernard Fanning song is an indictment against all leaders and ourselves for it is we who vote them into that position.  So I challenge those who state they have faith to think, pray and carefully discern who gets the vote.  Put aside our political leanings and really very carefully, prayerfully and consciously consider what actually needs to happen.