By Carl Milsted, Jr.

Liberals want more equality. Conservatives want a better legal climate for doing business. Environmentalists want to save ecosystems and reduce toxins in the environment. Moralists want people to behave better. Libertarians want to reduce taxation, bureaucracy and the prison population.

Who is right? This is the question addressed by editorials, radio talk shows and countless blogs. The proponents of each value proclaim how important their own values are, and how relatively unimportant the values of their opposition.

There is a fundamental problem with this debate approach: all of the values listed above are important. The various proponents know this deep within their minds, but often suppress this fact as they promote their favorite values. Instead, they focus on belittling the values of their respective opponents in order to make their own values seem more important by comparison.

There are two favorite approaches. First we have the fear mongers: gold bugs warn of hyperinflation just around the corner; environmentalists warn of imminent starvation, resource shortages, and/or climate change; Republicans see a terrorist behind every beard; and so on. The second approach is to personally attack members of the other side. Liberals attacked Clarence Thomas’ sexual advances; conservatives did the same for Bill Clinton. This is the favored tactic on talk radio. Listen to either 570 or 880 and you will hear the same personal accusations, only leveled at different people.

This is a poor way to make decisions.

It would be nice if each faction would be more intellectually honest and admit that all these values are important in an absolute sense. Then, they could focus on making an honest case for making relative improvements in their respective values, and the people could rationally weigh the trade-offs. But even this is not enough.

Trade-offs are only part of the picture. There are also synergies. There are actions which improve society according to multiple values at the same time. There are ways to improve the environment and increase material prosperity at the same time. There are ways to cut taxes and decrease the wealth gap. There are ways to reduce the prison population and promote better morals.

Finding these synergies is difficult when the political discussion is carried out by opposing factions focused on different values. Finding the synergies requires political thought that positively treats multiple values at the same time using the same brains.

I call this approach Holistic Politics. I use the term “holistic” not in some New Age sense of magic or meditation, but in the sense of looking at the whole picture.

In future columns I will apply this holistic approach to hot topics of the day. There will be essays on how to reduce red tape while fighting global warming, how to simplify taxes while reducing the wealth gap, how to reduce suburban sprawl while reducing property restrictions, and more. Liberty, security, prosperity, environmental preservation,…we can have more of all of these if we but open our minds to creative solutions.

Carl Milsted, Jr. is a senior editor for The Free Liberal.