When this country (USA) was in its infancy, strong, creative leaders, even if their ideas were less than perfect, were arguably essential to the nation’s sustainability. By now, however, the U.S electorate still seems stuck in endless cycles of choosing presidents who are, now more than ever it seems, expected to have sure-fire nation-saving concepts to impose on a public assumed to be essentially clueless. Checks and balances in the governing system helped us avoid the worst potential excesses of “strongman” leaders. With decades of experience in democracy, however, can’t we be more creative in researching, debating, and setting national policy – policy that would reflect something closer to the immense collective wisdom of the country, as well as more enlightened approaches to involving the citizenry in the business of running the country? If we believe in the validity of democracy, why not make it work harder instead of relegating the process to, for the most part, periodic elections in which many voters are effectively disenfranchised anyway?
Components of creating a national strategic plan have two primary categories - the processes that are necessary for change to occur, and the systems that are required to 'activate', or achieve change.
The processes begin to identify key issues that need to be addressed, as well as the barriers to change and the conditions necessary to implement change.
Each of these systems plays a critical yet distinct role in the quest of a functional and sustainable future, and all must interact harmoniously. For this to happen, we need to identify key issues and innovative practices, encourage knowledge sharing and gain an understanding of the interconnectedness of the various systems and their relationships/impacts on one another.
Why the biggest states and cities should push for a national strategic plan.