Republicans and Democrats: a macronutrient vs micronutrient approach.

Matthew Smith
5 min readNov 2, 2019
Photo by Victoria Shes on Unsplash

A couple of years back, a friend invited me to the Republican presidential debates where I listened to the likes of Marco Rubio & Ted Cruz speak. Last night, another friend extended an invitation to the Liberty and Justice dinner in Des Moines, where Democratic candidates Elizabeth Warren, Pete Buttigieg, and others were collectively stumping. After seeing them both, I came to the conclusion that listening to Republicans and Democrats talk politics is like watching a debate on personal health from a macronutrient vs. micronutrient approach.

Listening to Republicans and Democrats talk politics is like watching a debate on personal health from a macronutrient vs. micronutrient approach.

Republicans (the macronutrient approach): “We need more discipline, tighten the belt, restrict caloric intake, read the labels, eliminate carbs, eat more protein. Let’s get lean and yoked like we were in our 20's!”

Democrats (the micronutrient approach): “Biodiversity can improve our whole body’s immune system. We’ve got to start by focusing on having a diverse, gut microbiome. Let’s return to the earth: more nutrients, solve soil depletion, get more sunlight, and come grounded. Our diet has to be sustainable and capable of lasting a lifetime and beyond!”

Libertarians: “Don’t tell me what to eat! My body knows what it wants and needs naturally, and how to get it!”

There have been times in our country’s history where each approach has served us well. Here’s the problem with the geopolitical version of the macronutrient approach in today’s world: it can confer temporary benefits but is not ultimately sustainable or wholistic.

Here’s the problem with the geopolitical version of the macronutrient approach in today’s world: it can confer temporary benefits but is not ultimately sustainable or wholistic.

There was a time in America’s history leading up to the 20th Century where we had the luxury of taking a more isolationist position on the world stage. This was because much of the diseases and wars occurring in Europe or Asia were kept largely at bay by the considerable geographical buffers of the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. During the 1930’s & '40s, our country’s moral character was put to the test when we were asked to consider the morality of continuing to stay neutral while the rest of our planet faced the existential crisis of the rise of Nazism.

World War II required that we– like a prize-fighter preparing for the fight of their life– take a temporary macronutrient approach to whip ourselves into fighting shape quickly. We figured out how to affordably mass-produce fast food for G.I.’s, while back at home, citizens rationed supplies in solidarity. Our country’s precious minerals were tapped to bulk up our defenses in the forms of ships, planes and atomic weapons. We grew bigger, stronger & faster and ultimately were able to successfully fight off the global threat.

When we returned home from WWII & Korea, in spite of our President’s warnings, we forgot to beat our swords back into plowshares. We continued to expand the military-industrial complex, and instead of returning to home-grown, nutritious food, we started feeding mass-produced, G.I. ration-inspired-foods to our children. This ultimately led to the modern, American diet and our current health crisis (a topic for another day).

Fast-forward 90 years. There are those who continue to beat the drum of American exceptionalism and isolationism as if we still existed in a 19th Century vacuum. The reality of the 21st Century is that we have been forever globally knit together by the internet and affordable rapid transit. Scientific insight and our own experiences connecting with other cultures have shown us that our bodies, our families, our cities, states, nations, and indeed the entire world do not exist in a vacuum– they are completely interdependent.

Consider the process of our breath. It is a two-step dance between us and a tree or other plant. Really think about that. When the full cycle of your breath requires a plant to take your exhaled carbon dioxide and convert it into oxygen, then, that plant becomes as essential to your survival as your own lungs. We need to consider our neighboring countries like those plants. Whatever we do as a nation that promotes and improves their stability, their quality of life- will, in turn, help our nation and secure our borders. That which poisons, hurts or destabilizes our neighbors– will, conversely, hurt us. Our existential threats today are ones that require consideration of the health of the whole planet. This necessitates a political micronutrient consideration.

Our existential threats today are ones that require consideration of the health of the whole planet. This necessitates a political micronutrient consideration.

To tackle the challenges we face as a planet, we must stop looking at things from the perspective of only our part of the body/planet. We must reduce our focus on external appearances and trying to regain our youth or the greatness of a bygone era. We need to accept the reality of today and focus on making it the best now we can achieve. A strong heart cannot exist without strong lungs.

The job of the POTUS is largely a symbolic role, and as such, more than ever it requires someone with the vision to consider the health of the whole body and threats to it both foreign and domestic. It should be someone who understands the path of returning America to greatness means inspiring it through speaking to the highest ideals within each-and-every one of us, those like love and compassion which drives out the darkness, rather than adding to it (by appealing to the baser aspects of human nature like greed and tribalism).

This can be a tough sell as it’s the long-game.

When talking to the stomach, sometimes a fast can feel like starving– even though it can ultimately stimulate new tissue growth and encourage cellular cleansing throughout the body.

To the mouth, being asked to taste foods from strange, exotic places feels like force-feeding– even though those diverse, sometimes alien flavors provide new information which helps boost the body’s immune system by exposing it to new bacteria, minerals, and curative properties.

Whatever party she or he comes from, the next POTUS must be someone willing to become the embodiment of hard work while asking us as citizens to do likewise– to eat our proverbial vegetables. We need someone who leads by example, showing us how to lean into the national work we must do to once-and-for-all heal our old wounds, so our nation’s body can fully realize it’s the ability to perform optimally when each part finally gets what it needs. We need a POTUS unafraid to voice aloud and unequivocally that all parts of the body are appreciated, on the same team, working for a common good. In short, we need healing.

I’ve voted Libertarian, Republican, and Democrat in my lifetime and I tend to vote for who and what I think our country needs at the time. Unfortunately, our current POTUS has proven himself unsuited to the task. He’s succumbed to his ego, has remained singularly focused on one part of the body while other parts succumb to disease, and he remains obsessed with external appearances. Too much head and not enough heart is a recipe for disaster. We can do better and we must. Right now, I believe the political micronutrient approach is what the body needs.

--

--

Matthew Smith

Religion major turned real estate investor, tech company founder and food truck operator. Part-time adventurer, writer, full-time dad & loving husband.