“The concept of yin yang which is often referred to in the West as ‘yin and yang,’ is used to describe how polar opposites or seemingly contrary forces are interconnected and interdependent in the natural world, and how they give rise to each other in turn. The two are not opposing forces (dualities), but complementary opposites that interact within a greater whole, as part of a dynamic system. Everything has both yin and yang aspects as light cannot exist without darkness and vice-versa, but either of these aspects may manifest more strongly in particular objects, and may ebb or flow over time.” – Wikipedia

Let us now look at the liberal and conservative ideologies from the yin yang perspective:

Consider the idea of “ebb and flow over time.” Ask a conservative if there is ever a time for liberal policies and she will say, “no, never.” Ask a liberal the same about their opposite and you will get the same answer. But, this cannot be true. There are times and circumstances for the application of each. Over time, the ebb and flow of the yin and the yang creates a teeter totter affect. Only occasionally do things achieve a state of neutral balance.

The idea of checks and balances built into our form of government mirror the idea of yin yang. Our founders had the good sense to defend the people from absolute power and corruption. Trust me, if the Republicans had total control for too long, they would eventually abuse the power. The Democrats would do likewise. Power corrupts, etc. Some favor elimination of political parties, but I feel the system is not broken.

Let us now witness a dialog between Mr. Yin and Mr. Yang in the year 2011:

YIN>> America is a great and wealthy nation. Americans are fortunate for their circumstance and should be willing to share their great wealth with the less fortunate.

YANG>> Presently, America is nearly bankrupt and we are $14.8 trillion dollars in debt. When liberals speak of more spending to help the less fortunate I must ask how are we going to pay for it?

YIN>> It would only be fair if some of the wealth of the richest people in America could be redistributed.

YANG>> Redistribution by any means other than voluntary would clearly be theft.

YIN>> I am only asking that rich people give their fair share.

YANG>> When government is given the task it must create more and larger bureaucracies to perform the redistribution. That causes a higher cost in tax dollars. Fair and equitable is not the issue. Americans are generous and want to help the needy, but free men desire to give voluntarily to help those they choose, because that is the way of free men.

YIN>> Well, it sounds like you are speaking of middle income, or middle-America types. I am speaking of rich Americans, mostly Republicans. They need to give more, because they can afford it.

YANG>> Well, there you go again. Please understand that I am speaking about all Americans and I certainly hope I am speaking for the majority. The federal government was not constituted by “we the people” for the purpose of being a bureaucratic agent of charity or welfare.

YIN>> Regardless of what you say, the result would be the same. If the process is left to private citizens nothing will be done, the needy will remain needy and the hungry will not be fed.

YANG>> I respectfully disagree. In a low tax, high economic growth environment all Americans have more disposable income and there is nothing that brings them more satisfaction, more inner peace, than helping their fellow man. I worked for a non-profit, charitable services organization for many years. I observed individuals and corporations giving generously to help those less fortunate. A part of my patriotic pride of being an American is based on the good heart of the American people.

YIN>> If what you say is true, why did the government have to step in? Why were welfare programs ever necessary?

YANG>> The Federal Government did not need to step in. Let me be clear: I am not speaking of Medicare or Social Security. But, there are a multitude of government run programs that have no purpose other than the perpetuation of their own existence. These cost billions of tax dollars annually. Many of these programs were created by politicians of both parties for the purpose of expressing their progressive attitudes in the hopes of garnering reelection votes. Before all this became commonplace, very few Americans starved to death or lacked for shelter, or basic needs. That level of public assistance was performed by churches, families, and private charitable organizations. But, these arguments are moot. What really matters at this present time is that the American people whose taxes fund the United States government can no longer afford to allow the runaway federal spending and exploding debt. A continuation of past policies will soon complete the destruction of our economy and the devaluation of our currency. Then there will be chaos in the streets and starvation will be the national health concern.

YIN>> Okay, Mr. Smart Guy, there are no easy solutions. How then shall we fix the problem? Shall we raise taxes on everyone, or print more money on the government printing presses? This is America and I agree we are generous people, so there must be a solution that does not ignore our needy citizens, but one that does help resolve the economic and fiscal problems of our country.

YANG>> I agree there are no easy solutions. But, there are solutions. They will not be painless and some will take time. Taking care of the needy is valid concern. My thinking is that we must solve bigger problems first to establish the means to help our neighbors. Gross waste in our bloated bureaucracy, corruption in high places, and billions of tax dollars wasted on useless foreign aid should be the first priorities. A reform of the tax code could also increase net tax income to the government while not increasing tax rates and such a reform could certainly play a major role in revitalizing our economy. Economic growth has a way of curing many ills.

YIN>> I concede that your ideas have merit. But, I remain concerned on behalf of some of our citizens.

YANG>> I share your concern for all of our citizens. But, I fully believe that economic growth, less wasted federal spending, and a revised tax code could be the foundation for a positive upward spiral that would elevate the spirits and the well-being of all our citizens. However, I remain concerned whether we the people will unite in the cause to take back our nation from self-serving politicians and special interest groups. And lest we forget, a corrupt people will always be led by corrupt politicians whom they have elected for all the wrong reasons. That identifies America’s greatest need. It is for a great awakening, a spiritual revival like we have never experienced before.

YIN>> A moral America would be a better America. We can agree on that. I am also a Believer. It is not difficult to see that America, all of America, would benefit beyond hope if we would repent and turn back to God. Let us unite under His direction to once again become great.