Timothy J. Kunselman: Our society needs competitive balance

Freedom must be championed and defended every day. Otherwise, the quest for power will eventually overwhelm us.

Freedom cannot be without limits, or again, the quest for power will intrude and ruin. We have freedom of speech but, one may not yell “fire” in a crowded theater. One may not libel or slander another. (But for politicians — a topic for another day.) In order for a free society to endure, there must be limits, controls, rule of law.

I am a believer in capitalism. Authoritarianism, repression, socialism, communism, all are failed philosophies. They destroy freedom and opportunity and hopes and dreams. Capitalism offers purpose in finding the means to provide for physical needs and a path to greater things than just surviving. However, capitalism without restriction leads to monopoly and the elimination of competition. This is why we have anti-trust laws. Capitalism gone too far eliminates the game itself.

There are relatable examples found in sports. When the 1970s Steelers became so good on defense, certain rules were changed to bring balance between the offenses and defenses. Who wants to see a game with no scoring? When baseball pitchers became so dominant, the mound was lowered to give hitters a chance to succeed. A chance to succeed — a fair opportunity to improve one’s lot in life. Leveling the playing field so that anyone can rise to the top. Providing the same education to everyone until one can choose the education they seek.

There are many examples of history repeating itself. Lessons are repeated until learned. Examine the issue of “court packing.” This is not the first time this thought has occurred to presidents and other politicians. FDR looked hard at the prospect. The very idea is for political gain — to get a competitive advantage in moving on one’s own agenda, a work- around to the established checks and balances. Some may call it stacking the deck.

The Supreme Court should remain at nine members. Presidents nominate, senators approve. Vetting should be carefully performed with a focus on rule of law and faithfulness to the Constitution. But the human element will always represent a risk to competitive balance.

The lesson for us all is that one may not cheat and win. If someone must cheat, they and we should rethink who they are and what they stand for. If a team is losing, personnel and coaches are changed. Tactics are reexamined. Culture is improved. In politics, a lost election should lead to reexamination and to persuading others that a candidate or party will improve the lives of the majority and represent the minorities. This must be accomplished within the rules, abiding by the Constitution.

We need to look for leaders who are of good character and who are guided by their oath of office. Competitive balance is preserved or restored through the power of the vote and by lawful change. There should be an acceptance of a good result when a perfect result is not attainable (it never is) and the parties regroup, taking a win when it is available, and get ready for the next game. Steady, moderate, conservative changes will bring fairness and freedom to the extent possible. Those who propagate radical change do not consider the consequences that attend it. Burn it all down and go backwards?

We don’t have time for extremism. We truly do not. We need to stick together as brothers and sisters in this game of life, assuring that we all live to play again another day.

Timothy J. Kunselman of Pittsburgh is a retired attorney.