Solutioning Software
There is a myriad of problems that software developers face. The problems could range from how to store, display, and how to transmit data. It may not seem like much, but these issues can provide many details to solve. In simple terms, there are many ways to store, display, and transmit data. “Which one to pick?” is the question asked by developers. In every occasion, a good developer works with a team to provide a solution.
Good software developers like to make programs efficient to the use case. The best example to think about is the frequency of website design changes. A commonly used website should change its user interface multiple times, because the designer and developer perceive different problems over time to address.
I have faced several problems in my young career. While I do not recall what those problems were, they were trying to make something more efficient. In every problem, I have been able to see multiple solutions. Because of this, I’ve affectionately described programming as solving your own problem, which means that each developer could solve problems their own way. This is why developers are sometimes opinionated on which tools they use. Each tool they evaluate and end up using demonstrates a developer’s reasoning.
Because another programmer can solve the same problem a different way, if a team of programmers coordinate with each other, the resulting software increases in quality. The quality increases because working as a team will lessen the possibility of error due to developer preferences. Preferences could sometime get in the way. Teamwork drives a software product into production. Because teamwork is required, then the merging of opinions and expertise happens while in development. A successful development where every developer gives their effort will result in a great software product.
In my view, the prosperity of the country is similar. There are several teams, or political parties, that all have ideas on how to make something more efficient. Each one of these teams needs to work in the same team and with the other team in order for prosperity to happen. Working together in every form allows for solutions that everyone can agree on. If there are any rogue members or teams that will refuse to work together, the prosperity of the country will begin to fail.
A Thought Experiment
I had a thought experiment with one brother. I asked him, “What are the general reasons a Democrat could choose to be a Democrat? What are the general reasaons a Republican could choose to be a Republican?” The though experiment was insightful, and I started to see how everyone has a story and their own respectful reasoning.
why a democrat
A Democrat would choose to be a Democrat because he could believe that at least the government could provide a fallback in case all other safety options are gone. What lessons in history could point to this?
Any economic recession could give reason to be a Democrat. The Great Depression, the Great Recession, and the COVID crash could all give ample reasons for someone to choose to be a Democrat. A dramatic economic crash left many Americans destitute. Several people lost jobs, and people could not aid their living.
Another example is racism. Due to several post American Civil War situations, meaningful life for African Americans was stressful and dangerous. There wasn’t much done in order for African Americans to find meaningful work or life. The American Civil War did end slavery, but it didn’t end racism. The government would have to step in soon in order to provide something meaningful for African Americans.
I readily admit that I summarized the previous points briefly; there could be much more to study and to verify. However, this was a thought experiment with my brother, and I surmised the experiment proved a point as to why a person would choose to be a Democrat.
Why a Republican
A Republican would choose to be a Republican because he could believe that the economy is self regulating. Provident companies can provide jobs for people if left unhindered. And with the pay from companies, people can provide for themselves. And then once people can provide for themselves, they can also prepare for emergencies. Again, what lessons in history could give reasons to be a Republican?
Modern history could provide some reasons to be a Republican. The large tech companies and boom of the information technology industry allows companies like Amazon, Facebook, Apple, and Google to give jobs. Not only do large technology companies provide many jobs, but many smaller tech companies can provide jobs too. There are many companies with their own mobile application on the App or Play Store. What about jobs that are less technical? Companies like FedEx and Amazon need production and storage warehouses. These warehouses need to be staffed and managed. There is reason that companies provide jobs and people find their own living.
Classically speaking, many modern day Republicans will cite the Reagan presidency and they will use Reagan as proof that fiscal conservatism helped boom the economy at the time. That’s because the government got out of the way of companies and its citizens. Due to the government getting out of the way, companies and individual citizens could do what they wanted with their money.
Again, I breifly explained the previous examples, and there is history to study in these occasions. But like I previously stated with the reasons to be a Democrat, I can see how the thought exeriment proved the point of why a Republican would choose to be a Republican.
everyone has a story
I hope when I say “everyone has story”, it is abundantly clear what I mean. Everyone has a story and their own reasoning, and because of that everyone deserves to be listened to. Stories provide experience, experience helps a person decide their personality, and a personality could bring about a person’s reasoning. No one has the same story or experience. No one perceives things exactly the same way, although things could be similar, and because things could be perceived as similar, that is why people group together into factions within a country.
Old Wise Advice
George Washington, the father the United States, gave wise advice in his farewell address. Washington talked about many ideas. He talked about sectionalism, proper representation, and a unified government. Washington believed that if the United States could follow his advice, then the new country could prosper. Even though Washington’s advice was 200+ years ago, does it apply today?
Washington starts his farewell address about sectionalism. The United States has several different geographic regions with their own local advantages. The North has all the industries, while the South has all the farms. The East has access to many sea ports in order to do trade, and the West has all the resources to supply that trade. With all these different sections within the United States, Washington warns that it is easy to have someone misrepresent the interests of another region. For example, the interests of the South will not be the same interests as the North; a representative from the South could misrepresent the needs of the North.
One of the expedients of party to acquire influence within particular districts is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts. You cannot shield yourselves too much against the jealousies and heart burnings which spring from these misrepresentations. They tend to render alien to each other those who ought to be bound together by fraternal affection.
A person that wants influence in one party could target misrepresentations of another party. For a historic example, the South didn’t like how the North had all the industry, and the South didn’t like that people from the North are telling what the South should do. A person that didn’t want to listen to these misrepresentations will find it hard to not to listen. It is sad when another party alienates another. Citizens of the United States should be bound together with “fraternal affection” because we are all part of the same country with the same duty to that country.
Washington points towards a government for a solution of misrepresentation. “To the efficacy and permanency of your Union, a government for the whole is indispensable.” How can different sections of a country be united? Accurate representations for every group in a government. The government in essence becomes a middle man for all representations. Then with a middle man, a trusted government can help the whole country be united.
But what if a part of the government isn’t working? This is where Washington points out the existing amendment process in the Constitution. There is a process and system set with the Constitution in order to run an effective government. Washington shows confidence that a functioning central government that follows the rules can accurately represent the people.
Washington further evaulates the importance of being friendly to all nations and to not have any permanent allies.
[I]nveterate antipathies against particular nations and passionate attachments for others should be excluded and that in place of them just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. That nation that indulges towards another an habitual hatred or an habitual fondess is in some degree a slave.
If there is any hostility or a strong friendship with another country, those countries become bound to each other in one form or another. The bound relationship will be hostile or favored, and that relationship would dictate any dealings with that country. Washington noted this because he wasn’t sure that a country’s authentic interests would be fulfilled in obligated foreign interests.
Instead, foreign relationships must be neutral and friendly, then United States can handle it’s own affairs better. The United States does not have to be involved with affairs that have no matter to the United States. This was probably on Washington’s mind at the time due to the events of the French Revolution. Washington must have been indifferent towards Europe, because he saw that the United States should have no interest in European political deals.
Europe has a set of primary interests, which to us have none, or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence therefore it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.
It could be that Washington mentioned the need for a neutral and friendly relationship with other foreign countries, because there is no civic obligation or interest to do so. A citizen of a country has a civic duty to that country the citizen belongs to, not to another country. Washington probably worried that foreign affairs would distract parties within the country to offset the government representation of the people.
The time and culture of George Washington certainly dictated his farewell address to the United States. As such, the farewell address could belong to that day. But from a scholarly and educational viewpoint, one could ask if Washington’s advice could apply to today’s world. Is history bound to repeat itself, so old advice has some merit? What history is being repeated? What details are similar? Or are there differing details that would make Washington’s advice irrelevant? If so, then what are the different details? Can they be enumerated and therefore provided with a solution? I leave that to the discretion of the reader for discussion and research.
Just as a summary of Washington’s farewell address, Washington seemed to have wanted a unified country, and he saw the problems and dangers of the time that could divide the new country. And Washington hoped to address and provide solutions to those problems that the country could face.
More to Research
I don’t think I have the best reasoning, however I do think I’ve started on a valuable path for me. I think I need to do more research. Hopefully, I can gain more knowledge and trust that I am doing something that is good for me. This research can involve reading and studying numerous books. I can also talk with experts and get their opinions. I want to learn more for my own benefit.
Same Team
In the United States, there are several teams. But what is beneficial about all these teams, is that we are underneath one bigger team, the United States. We have all chosen to continue living here and to stand for what the United States means to us.
Generally speaking, the United States stands for unified diversity and people being able to live comfortably. I accept that everyone could define this a little differently, but I think every definition will be about the same. Since we are all underneath the team of the United States, then we need to work together. If we work together, like how I work with my team and company at my job, then the prosperity of the country could extend even farther.
The teams within the country are political parties. Political parties could do good with the work of unified people. They help people of similar thinking to group up, because people like to belong with people that think similarly. Political parties are small focused teams that belong to the bigger team. Since political parities of a country belong to that country, it is up to each political party to work with the other party. There is a civic duty to work with other people of differing beliefs. Working together can bring further unity and propserity to a country.
If there is no cooperation done between parties, then the possibility of error and systematic failure could occur. Groups of people could be misrepresented. The country could be bound to interests that have nothing to do with the country. The country and the people could could tied up in what really needs to be done.
Exactly how team members work together, the parties of the United States should work together for the benefit of the country. Trust that the other party has the country’s benefit in their best interest. Avoid things that could tie up interests that are not part of civic duty and everyone living in that country.