No room for commonality?

Romney writes about good, evil, and “‘common humanity’” with intense skepticism. “Before we jettison our reliance on U.S. strength, there must be something effective in its place — if such a thing is even possible,” he writes. If anyone is wondering what American exceptionalism looks like, he’s demonstrated it for you in a single sentence. “The appeal to ‘common humanity’ as the foundation of this new world order ignore the reality that humanity is far from common in values and views. Humanity may commonly agree that there is evil, but what one people calls evil another calls good,” Romney writes.

In an apparently impossible feat, the U.S. and all nations within NATO and the EU have agreed upon a number of common evils this week — and across history nations have found common ground and pooled efforts. Countries may not always agree on every moral or logistical issue, but that’s why it’s called compromise, and that’s why cooperation is done on a case by case basis. No one is proposing we marry our morals to other nations. The smart nation goes on geopolitical dates as the mood suits.

The flaw of switches over dials

Romney’s argument is one built on switch logic instead of dials. Either on or off, no in between. Either the U.S. pulls back from the world and allows “power-hungry tyrants” to “feast on the appeasers” or pour funding into maintaining the strongest possible military, competing desperately with other growing militaries as though we had not an ally in the world. Either we concentrate on issues close to home, and keep taxes low, or we fund our defense. Some of his arguments are fair — we don’t know the exact military strength of China, Russia, and others. We do need to maintain a degree of involvement in global affairs, and the world is not less dangerous than it was thirty years ago. But his either or logic is flawed and limiting.

Now to return to Mr. Maslow for a moment. The psychologist offers one more relevant concept when looking at Romney’s argument. During his career Maslow’s most well known accomplishment was his “hierarchy of needs.” This was his theory that human beings had different needs, each valued somewhat more or less than others, and that as each priority was filled, others would become available for consideration. For example, at the very base of his pyramid hierarchy were physical needs such as food, water, and shelter. Then came security and security. Only after these two basic things were fulfilled could morality, friendship, and self-actualization be achieved. Romney is stuck at the base of the pyramid — but our nation need not be, and indeed should not be if we’re to find international security outside of ourselves.

More from Politics Cheat Sheet:

• How Will Budget Cuts Change America’s Military Might?
• These U.S. Lawmakers Approve of Military Strikes in Iraq
• Here’s Where the U.S. Military Failed Bergdahl and Many Recruits

Follow Anthea Mitchell on Twitter @AntheaWSCS

Want more great content like this? Sign up here to receive the best of Cheat Sheet delivered daily. No spam; just tailored content straight to your inbox.