Why don’t we give peace a chance?

I was charmed by Rama Kumar’s Marin Voice published recently in the IJ (“More than ever, John Lennon’s message must be heard,” Dec. 19). Yes I agree. So do over 80% of people in the U.S. and around the world.

We want peace and progress. Yet our adversarial democratic election process hands national leadership to people who, far too much, crave fighting and personal recognition over problem solving. Why is that?

I don’t like fighting. If the stage is set for battle, I’ll stay on the sidelines, leaving engagement and mortal combat to those who love the rush. Sadly our incoming president will likely be blocked at every turn by leaders of his opposing party. Progress on any national concern, such as climate change, inequality, immigration, or health will be blocked simply because the opposition does not want the party in power to have success. The big loser, of course, is every American — you and me.

Most of us see issues as problems to be solved, not as winning or losing. But if you only see issues through the lens of combat, progress and solutions are irrelevant. That attitude limits our incoming president from effective solutions, just as it did former President Barack Obama. Combat has already begun.

Like you, I would love to give peace a chance. But as I stand back, allowing powerful “leaders” to define problem-solving as winning or losing, the world most of us want remains elusive.

— Barry Phegan, Greenbrae