On Election Day in my neighborhood it was take out the garbage night. I was hoping for congressional and legislative housecleaning to occur but I was disappointed.

It appears that the country as a whole wanted some change and that happened. I only hope that the saying “be careful what you wish for” doesn’t come back to haunt the electorate.

I would have liked to see some more balance in our political makeup not so much because I’m usually leaning toward the non-majority party but because I believe counter points of view result in better legislation, better laws, and overall better government.

I’ve generally always felt this way. My parents, my family, and my friends are a diverse group and the process of trying to decide issues and problems always seemed to get the best solution when more than one person, party, or group came up with the answer. Group think, I don’t think, ever came up with a good solution. This, at least for me, was reinforced over the last two weeks or so while reading a very good book.

The book, by Arthur Herman, is “The Cave and the Light.” The reviews for it weren’t that flattering which made it even more interesting reading just like seeing a movie that looks good and liking the actors but its panned by critics. I was taught at a very young age to do some studying and research on my own to make up my own mind about things. The book is also a Pulitzer-finalist.

Since it talks about philosophy and those sage wise men of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, it was way above my academic and intelligent level. However, since it was the time for American democracy and midterm elections, I gave it a shot. Basically, my interpretation is that throughout history, all our major political upheavals came about from society and populations either going with and supporting one side or the other and taking that side to extremes.

Plato followed and agreed with Socrates. Their philosophy, on how men are best governed, is based on faith in a higher being and that the best and most happiness comes when the individual submits himself to the service of the state (government). On the other hand, Aristotle broke from his teacher Plato and believed in some kind of religion but also thought that the individual was the key to being happy and government (the state) should be instituted under a system of proven facts, things that work in the real world, and science.

If I were, which I am going to do, offer which party is most closely associated with each philosophy, I would say that Republicans are with Plato and Democrats are more aligned with Aristotle. Why?

Republicans are the religious party. They believe in morals, a higher power, and think if we were all church-going, and more so church-obeying, our problems would be solved or disappear. They are against “big” government but certainly advocate the law-and-order menu (number of people in prison for non-violent drug offenses), setting rules down, and going first for enforcement action (immigration) before any consideration is given to revising a statute. I’m not attacking, agreeing, defending, or supporting any of these positions, just providing my observation here. All things, to include philosophies, can and have been taken to the radical side but it doesn’t mean the basic premise is wrong.

How would Aristotle seem to fall with the Democrats? Jefferson started this with the idea, the thought, that the people should determine what kind and how it’s to be run, a government. Most, to include myself, probably have no clue on how much of a change this was in 1776 to believe, and really, to even put to paper, our belief that the people get to determine what type of government they want and must give their consent to do so. Our founding fathers, starting with Madison, took this point of view with “We the people….” They started with a form of government that was in the best, and under the circumstances, the most “balanced” at the time. Trying to balance the individual, first, with different levels of government. Our federal system is the result of this effort — enumerated powers to the federal government, sovereignty to a limited degree to the states, and anything generally not otherwise mentioned, left by natural rights, to the individual.

Come January, we’ll have a new Congress. I’ll wait to see if by March how it’s going to go for the next two years. Election night and the following day brings the standard speeches of now working with the other side, trying to come to answers and reaching across the aisle. Both sides are guilty here of not doing the best they could and trying to win political points in the past. The test is to see if those things, unlike campaign signs and speeches, are accomplished or it’s back to business as usual.

I’ve listed our problems before and won’t do it again. If not solved, they at least should be resolved one way or the other. As one of those “people” I don’t think that’s too much to ask. Time is running out and I don’t want some national catastrophe or crisis to happen to force us to do what should have been accomplished decades ago. The talking is over, it’s now time for action. Plato or Aristotle are watching. Who is better for these United States?

I have hope but if I was going to place a bet, I believe I’d have better odds of buying a lottery ticket.

Thompson, who lives in Ogden, ran unsuccessfully for a Utah legislative seat.