The country we call Iran has presented one big problem for the U.S. for nearly 5 decades. One president after another has proposed or implemented solutions to what they define as “the problem.” They usually focus on preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.
But, does the possession of nuclear weapons represent the entirety of the “Iran problem,” or does it make up only part of a much larger problem? If Iran had no possibility of having a nuclear weapon, would they simply become a benign actor amongst Middle Eastern countries?
I do not pretend to know the answer to this question. I do strongly suspect that our “leaders” have never asked that question. Have been feeding us half elephants as substitutes for the whole thing.
Dividing an elephant
- “Dividing an elephant in half does not produce two elephants.”
As logical as it may seem, dividing a problem into smaller problems seldom works. If you have a big problem, you must treat it as such. You may have to take sequential steps to the solution, but you must coordinate these steps to solve the single problem.
The integrated, holistic, nature of living systems requires that they must remain intact to realize their full benefit. The whole equals more than the sum of its parts.
Governments build their reputations on promising half an elephant as if it were one elephant. Treating government spending and taxation as independent issues amounts to dividing the government interventionist elephant.
Commentary
For years I have had a suspicion of the word “compromise.” Instead of putting in the time and effort to identify and understand the magnitude of a problem and to create a single solution, compromisers frequently divide a single problem into two and implement two unrelated solutions.
Quite several years ago, I had the opportunity to study the Japanese management style. One thing that set the Japanese managers apart was that they did not believe in compromise. They believed instead in concencise. They took whatever time it took to get complete agreement, which meant total commitment to the solution. They did not seek compromise on partial solutions.
This approach frustrated American managers when they worked together. It seemed to take the Japanese so long to make a plan of action, but when they were ready to act, the Americans could not keep up.
Conclusion
When faced with a problem, assure yourself that you understand its scope and design a plan of action that addresses the entirety of the problem.