Men At Work
This chart shows that the number of working males has dropped back to 1996 levels when there were 30 million less citizens in the U.S. A lot of angry unemployed men in an interregnum is a recipe for social unrest and fascism. Any student of the rise of Hitler to power in 1933 understands that the depression unleashed a huge number of unemployed young and middle-aged German men onto the streets only to be organized by the Nazis. Here’s Eric Hobsbawm from The Age of Extremes
“Fascism was triumphantly anti-liberal. It also provided the proof that man can, without difficulty, combine crack-brained beliefs about the world with a confident mastery of contemporary high technology…. Nevertheless, the combination of conservative values, the techniques of mass democracy, and an innovative ideology of irrationalist savagery, essentially centered in nationalism, must be explained….
At some point the Tea Party Movement could easily morph into a political machine that could combine “crack-brained beliefs” with “mastery of high technology”. The “crack-brained” ideas are already out there: illegal immigrants are the root of our unemployment problem; the President is a socialist traitor born in Africa;women should return to their traditional roles of unpaid “homemakers”; the government is convening death panels to decide who gets to live. The mastery of high technology is also in place: Fox is building Sarah Palin a TV and Internet studio on her Alaska Compound; Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity already rule over talk radio, cable news and online right wing sites.
William Astore, a retired Air Force Lieutenant Colonel paints a picture of the election of 2016 when all the anger comes together.
Tapping the frustration of protesters — including a renascent and mainstreamed “tea bag” movement — the former captains and sergeants, the ex-CIA operatives and out-of-work private mercenaries of the War on Terror take action. Conflict and confrontation they seek; laws and orders they increasingly ignore. As riot police are deployed in the streets, they face a grim choice: where to point their guns? Not at veterans, they decide, not at America’s erstwhile heroes.
A dwindling middle-class, still waving the flag and determined to keep its sliver-sized portion of the American dream, throws its support to the agitators. Wages shrinking, savings exhausted, bills rising, the sober middle can no longer hold. It vents its fear and rage by calling for a decisive leader and the overthrow of a can’t-do Congress.
Unless we start reimagining America After Empire–a country where the serious work of rebuilding a broken infrastructure can be funded from the reductions in a cold war based military budget–the potential of a more violent right wing movement will exist. Bob Herbert suggests the alternative path.
Bruce Katz, the director of Brookings’ Metropolitan Policy Program, discussed some of the steps that need to be taken to remake an economy that has been thrown completely out of whack by frantic, debt-driven consumption, speculative bubbles, exotic financial instruments, and so on.
A new, saner, more sustainable economy will have to be more export-oriented, powered by cleaner fuels, bolstered by innovation that comes from a renewed focus on research and development, and committed to delivering a better-educated, more highly skilled work force.
Mr. Katz believes this is doable, but by no means easy. The nation’s infrastructure, he said, will have to “shift from 20th-century models of transport and energy transmission to rapid bus, ubiquitous broadband, congestion pricing, smart grid, high-speed rail and intelligent transport.”
New ways of financing such transformative changes will have to be developed, linking public and private capital, preferably through the creation of a national infrastructure bank, among other things. The nation’s political leaders and the public at large will have to grasp the difference between wasteful spending and crucial investments in the future.
Don’t kid yourself into thinking that the alternative to taking up this challenge is political drift and “more of the same”. Even the right wing political establishment realizes it cannot control the movement unleashed by Palin, Beck and Co, symbolized by Palin’s endorsement of Rand Paul, Ron Paul’s son
“I’m disappointed by her endorsement of Paul,” said William Kristol, the editor of The Weekly Standard and one of the conservatives credited with “discovering” Ms. Palin in 2007. “But they always disappoint you.”
A very thought-provoking post. The dislocation of men from the workforce and from education is a ticking time bomb. What are millions of unemployed and poorly educated men going to do with themselves? Resentment will run high.
In particular Jon, we have to take the immigration issue seriously. I have always favored open immigration. Welcome all the Earth’s people. But we have to face the fact that American men, both black and white, can rightfully point to immigrants as depressing the working-class pay scale from lower middle class to poverty level. This is a tough issue for the Democratic Party. But we risk losing millions of men to a potentially violent right-wing movement.
I would suggest we need a Manhattan project to rescue boys and young men from an educational system that is failing many of them. If we can improve discipline and learning at the elementary and secondary levels, perhaps men will again want to go (and be prepared to go) to college and graduate school, and be qualified to take leadership roles in society. (Look at the new leaders we’re getting now: Sarah Palin and Scott Brown) The alternative to education and jobs for men is social disintegration, in 2016 or whenever.
As you have suggested, jobs programs for adult men (and women) are going to be needed. I don’t think we can solve our economic problems with an artificial jobs stimulus, but it might buy us some time.
Of course events don’t move in a straight line. It is entirely possible that unexpected solutions will appear. I will continue to be hopeful and to try to contribute positively.
A very thought-provoking post. The dislocation of men from the workforce and from education is a ticking time bomb. What are millions of unemployed and poorly educated men going to do with themselves? Resentment will run high.
In particular Jon, we have to take the immigration issue seriously. I have always favored open immigration. Welcome all the Earth’s people. But we have to face the fact that American men, both black and white, can rightfully point to immigrants as depressing the working-class pay scale from lower middle class to poverty level. This is a tough issue for the Democratic Party. But we risk losing millions of men to a potentially violent right-wing movement.
I would suggest we need a Manhattan project to rescue boys and young men from an educational system that is failing many of them. If we can improve discipline and learning at the elementary and secondary levels, perhaps men will again want to go (and be prepared to go) to college and graduate school, and be qualified to take leadership roles in society. (Look at the new leaders we’re getting now: Sarah Palin and Scott Brown) The alternative to education and jobs for men is social disintegration, in 2016 or whenever.
As you have suggested, jobs programs for adult men (and women) are going to be needed. I don’t think we can solve our economic problems with an artificial jobs stimulus, but it might buy us some time.
Of course events don’t move in a straight line. It is entirely possible that unexpected solutions will appear. I will continue to be hopeful and to try to contribute positively.
All the more reason to take part in the Tea Party movement ala Saul Alinsky. Get in while it’s still forming. Don’t let it harden into a protective shell. Reveal it for its commonalty of interest with its other half, the progressive/libertarian. Make it us versus gummint not them versus the Dems.
All the more reason to take part in the Tea Party movement ala Saul Alinsky. Get in while it’s still forming. Don’t let it harden into a protective shell. Reveal it for its commonalty of interest with its other half, the progressive/libertarian. Make it us versus gummint not them versus the Dems.
Last night while flying to Busan from Atlanta I caught up on my podcasts and listened to American Radio Works piece about the CCC – Roosevelt initiated the program precisely because so many young men were out of work and he was worried about them – it was a repeat show but a great piece of reporting http://americanradioworks.publicradio.org/features/infrastructure/
Also, I think I would be even more concerned about unemployed Chinese men (at least 15 million in the cities – more likely twice that number) – combine that with the projected 37 million Chinese men who will be unable to find wives by the year 2020 and I see a recipe for disaster
Last night while flying to Busan from Atlanta I caught up on my podcasts and listened to American Radio Works piece about the CCC – Roosevelt initiated the program precisely because so many young men were out of work and he was worried about them – it was a repeat show but a great piece of reporting http://americanradioworks.publicradio.org/features/infrastructure/
Also, I think I would be even more concerned about unemployed Chinese men (at least 15 million in the cities – more likely twice that number) – combine that with the projected 37 million Chinese men who will be unable to find wives by the year 2020 and I see a recipe for disaster
This gets back to the report, here, from.a couple weeks ago to the effect that in this fierce recession married men increasingly are relying on their wives as principal household bread-winners, rather than vice versa, ante. The implication is a salute to women’s growing earning power–Halleljah!–but the hidden tell therein is that, according to the Labor Department, men accounted for recessionary layoffs by a ratio, viz women, approaching 4:1.
Given our cultural characteristics these are tragic statistics. But it’s also fascinating to ponder the possibility that these sad times are reshaping social institutions as fundamental as gender and marriage.
This gets back to the report, here, from.a couple weeks ago to the effect that in this fierce recession married men increasingly are relying on their wives as principal household bread-winners, rather than vice versa, ante. The implication is a salute to women’s growing earning power–Halleljah!–but the hidden tell therein is that, according to the Labor Department, men accounted for recessionary layoffs by a ratio, viz women, approaching 4:1.
Given our cultural characteristics these are tragic statistics. But it’s also fascinating to ponder the possibility that these sad times are reshaping social institutions as fundamental as gender and marriage.
Thought-provoking, BJH. If you look carefully at any of the major lieracy surveys, at least three things startle: the sheer scale of illiteracy in the U.S.; the extent to which this is not explained by immigration; and how much of the illiteracy is that of males.
Thought-provoking, BJH. If you look carefully at any of the major lieracy surveys, at least three things startle: the sheer scale of illiteracy in the U.S.; the extent to which this is not explained by immigration; and how much of the illiteracy is that of males.
Only I, Emperor of the United States and Protector of All the Covinas, could manage to misspell “literacy”!
Only I, Emperor of the United States and Protector of All the Covinas, could manage to misspell “literacy”!
Interesting points, Fiona.
Imagine a CCC focused on the deployment of green infrastructure. Wouldn’t that be great?
Interesting points, Fiona.
Imagine a CCC focused on the deployment of green infrastructure. Wouldn’t that be great?
Jon –
Excellent post — a very thoughtful (and scary) analysis.
Found this analysis on another blog, thought it was very relevant to your current line of thinking:
http://www.boingboing.net/2010/02/05/santa-fe-institute-e.html
Jon –
Excellent post — a very thoughtful (and scary) analysis.
Found this analysis on another blog, thought it was very relevant to your current line of thinking:
http://www.boingboing.net/2010/02/05/santa-fe-institute-e.html
…except, remember that Alinsky was advising weaseling into the Establishment, not the anti-Establishment. The tea party plaintiffs are truly grassroots and ad hoc, whereas Alinsky was a consummate elitist. He seemed to feel that he owned so much truth that there was none left for anyone else. But I agree with you that the T’d people are unfocused.
…except, remember that Alinsky was advising weaseling into the Establishment, not the anti-Establishment. The tea party plaintiffs are truly grassroots and ad hoc, whereas Alinsky was a consummate elitist. He seemed to feel that he owned so much truth that there was none left for anyone else. But I agree with you that the T’d people are unfocused.
zenkat, disturbing. Flummoxing, actually. In economics, I admit, I’ve two brown thumbs. How does one calculate such things? Seriously. Do you go out and systems engineers to run time/motion studies, or what? How can we tell what proportion of economic effort is devoted to whom? I mean, I’m not quibbling about the colorful anthropomorphization, 1:4, but how does one get there?
Also, I don’t whether you’re in California–I write from Atlanta–but the rap on my home state, CA, runs opposite to this link. It seems that CA overtoppled when finally it paid off too many by taxing too few too much. Surely you know the reasoning. I’m just saying it’s curious to argue that in a state such as Jon’s every fourth person is Captain warranting his or her personal adjutant. I can’t figure the math.
zenkat, disturbing. Flummoxing, actually. In economics, I admit, I’ve two brown thumbs. How does one calculate such things? Seriously. Do you go out and systems engineers to run time/motion studies, or what? How can we tell what proportion of economic effort is devoted to whom? I mean, I’m not quibbling about the colorful anthropomorphization, 1:4, but how does one get there?
Also, I don’t whether you’re in California–I write from Atlanta–but the rap on my home state, CA, runs opposite to this link. It seems that CA overtoppled when finally it paid off too many by taxing too few too much. Surely you know the reasoning. I’m just saying it’s curious to argue that in a state such as Jon’s every fourth person is Captain warranting his or her personal adjutant. I can’t figure the math.
A point to ponder: innovation is not always the most expensive technology but that is the way the RFPs read. Because the golden rule of negotiation is to leave no money on the table, inexpensive systems are sold to the government at high prices with the excess distributed to the many partners who’s celebrity opens doors to the venture, who’s names lend fascination but who contribute nothing to the design or the implementation.
We have a very inefficient procurement system in this country because as it ever was, the money men of the elite schools pontificate theory in public yet deal in private exactly as the robber barons did. The anger continuing to build in this country is against the class that continues to treat the treasury as their private piggy bank and Vegas as their playground while their employees work long hours and weekends to support their fly and party lifestyles. They sell us crap we don’t need and when their market campaign blunders into the ire rising against these factless and tactless messages, they call themselves victims.
To add incindiaries to the fire, the media are increasingly seen as the propaganda wings of the wealthy while failing the simple test of journalism to report facts. It’s a perfect storm for the emergence of movements such as Jon describes but it is not the politics of left or right; it is class and wealth and … damm dirty lies.
When even Toyota is willing to let us die to protect their profit margins, movements such as the tea partiers begin to look too forgiving and well-scripted apologies won’t cut it.
Apophenia and gestalt emergence are not about logical connections but edges that establish forms even where none exist. Caveat vendor.
A point to ponder: innovation is not always the most expensive technology but that is the way the RFPs read. Because the golden rule of negotiation is to leave no money on the table, inexpensive systems are sold to the government at high prices with the excess distributed to the many partners who’s celebrity opens doors to the venture, who’s names lend fascination but who contribute nothing to the design or the implementation.
We have a very inefficient procurement system in this country because as it ever was, the money men of the elite schools pontificate theory in public yet deal in private exactly as the robber barons did. The anger continuing to build in this country is against the class that continues to treat the treasury as their private piggy bank and Vegas as their playground while their employees work long hours and weekends to support their fly and party lifestyles. They sell us crap we don’t need and when their market campaign blunders into the ire rising against these factless and tactless messages, they call themselves victims.
To add incindiaries to the fire, the media are increasingly seen as the propaganda wings of the wealthy while failing the simple test of journalism to report facts. It’s a perfect storm for the emergence of movements such as Jon describes but it is not the politics of left or right; it is class and wealth and … damm dirty lies.
When even Toyota is willing to let us die to protect their profit margins, movements such as the tea partiers begin to look too forgiving and well-scripted apologies won’t cut it.
Apophenia and gestalt emergence are not about logical connections but edges that establish forms even where none exist. Caveat vendor.
Au contraire, mon frere. Alinsky was is about method not sides. The tea party though are truly synthetic for now and really fearful that they will lose momentum without the town meetings to rally around.
It will be interesting to see how they are treated by both parties when the national conventions meet and by local police forces, too.
Au contraire, mon frere. Alinsky was is about method not sides. The tea party though are truly synthetic for now and really fearful that they will lose momentum without the town meetings to rally around.
It will be interesting to see how they are treated by both parties when the national conventions meet and by local police forces, too.
Now that’s bloody interesting, that you drive the hard old distinction between tactics and strategy. That’s frankly a smart way to assay the T’d Ones, and also a fair estimate of Alinsky: purely tactical. Frankly I haven’t read him for 30 years but when I did do I was offput by his sheer Marxian arrogance. He seemed to think he was Il Duce. But then they shared a secret, in Machiavelli.
Watching first The Wall come down and then Gorby give up the ghost, with Yeltsin standing on the former’s political grave, I felt sure that we’d heard the last of the likes of Saul Alinsky, but obviously I underestimated the stubbornness of the American proffesoriat.
(incidentally I see that ditzy Palin last night promoted Obama from Lecturer to full Professor. In attempting to insult him she elevated him. That woman needs help.)
Now that’s bloody interesting, that you drive the hard old distinction between tactics and strategy. That’s frankly a smart way to assay the T’d Ones, and also a fair estimate of Alinsky: purely tactical. Frankly I haven’t read him for 30 years but when I did do I was offput by his sheer Marxian arrogance. He seemed to think he was Il Duce. But then they shared a secret, in Machiavelli.
Watching first The Wall come down and then Gorby give up the ghost, with Yeltsin standing on the former’s political grave, I felt sure that we’d heard the last of the likes of Saul Alinsky, but obviously I underestimated the stubbornness of the American proffesoriat.
(incidentally I see that ditzy Palin last night promoted Obama from Lecturer to full Professor. In attempting to insult him she elevated him. That woman needs help.)
First, copyright “caveat vendor” before it’s too late, and I hope it’s not so. Second, unlike you and others here, I’m quite ignorant of the business of producing actual art–I’m just a former hack–but I almost can’t tell you how much I appreciate your bridging from the declaration of art to designing of plans in the common interest. Len, you are a Renaissance Man. If you count the women we’ve got at least twice as many.
First, copyright “caveat vendor” before it’s too late, and I hope it’s not so. Second, unlike you and others here, I’m quite ignorant of the business of producing actual art–I’m just a former hack–but I almost can’t tell you how much I appreciate your bridging from the declaration of art to designing of plans in the common interest. Len, you are a Renaissance Man. If you count the women we’ve got at least twice as many.
The edges are indeed where all the action is (I remember Chaos theory). I also remember Camus’ Myth of Sisyphus. So must one make a leap of faith over to the Tea Party Fascists (or to the Big Green Help) or become a nihilist advocating a destructive class war for war’s sake? I don’t think so. None of these is really my style. I think I’ll hang with Len and BJH out here on the edge and just try to push my rock in the best direction I can. I know that in my lifetime and probably my kids’ and maybe forever it’s bound to roll back, but the journey is the destination man.
The edges are indeed where all the action is (I remember Chaos theory). I also remember Camus’ Myth of Sisyphus. So must one make a leap of faith over to the Tea Party Fascists (or to the Big Green Help) or become a nihilist advocating a destructive class war for war’s sake? I don’t think so. None of these is really my style. I think I’ll hang with Len and BJH out here on the edge and just try to push my rock in the best direction I can. I know that in my lifetime and probably my kids’ and maybe forever it’s bound to roll back, but the journey is the destination man.
Godspeed.
Godspeed.
Hey Amber, I’ve quoted this here before but I wish to commend it to you in particular: Helen Keller once said that she didn’t “give a damn about ’semi-radcals’”.
Hey Amber, I’ve quoted this here before but I wish to commend it to you in particular: Helen Keller once said that she didn’t “give a damn about ’semi-radcals’”.
Yeah, and I don’t give a damn about other peoples’ bandwagons. Too many are being used to to try to sell me shit I don’t need.
Signed,
The dumb, cynical, redneck who thinks both sides are run by greedy bastards
Yeah, and I don’t give a damn about other peoples’ bandwagons. Too many are being used to to try to sell me shit I don’t need.
Signed,
The dumb, cynical, redneck who thinks both sides are run by greedy bastards
Reflections in a Distant Mirror.
More ammo! Heads on pikes! And darn, it’s getting harder and harder to string ‘em up on the no-longer-gas-lit lamp-posts — no more crossbar ladder rests for the ropes to depend from.
I hear the farther many people get in old age, the more circumscribed their horizons, and the stronger their interest in seeing that nothing survives them. “If I’m not here, I’ll be doddamned if the next folks are going to have any fun.”
Reflections in a Distant Mirror.
More ammo! Heads on pikes! And darn, it’s getting harder and harder to string ‘em up on the no-longer-gas-lit lamp-posts — no more crossbar ladder rests for the ropes to depend from.
I hear the farther many people get in old age, the more circumscribed their horizons, and the stronger their interest in seeing that nothing survives them. “If I’m not here, I’ll be doddamned if the next folks are going to have any fun.”
Jon, what happens if the Tea Party crowd just get their way?
We cut public employee salaries down to private levels.
We forget about global warming bs, and we drill / nuclear for energy independence.
Teachers unions are done.
The age of Medicare is slowly humanely raised.
—–
That’s it. No more anger.
It could very well be, that Obama has driven the Independents squarely into the conservative’s camp. That’s a much more likely event than your mad max porn thing.
Jon, what happens if the Tea Party crowd just get their way?
We cut public employee salaries down to private levels.
We forget about global warming bs, and we drill / nuclear for energy independence.
Teachers unions are done.
The age of Medicare is slowly humanely raised.
—–
That’s it. No more anger.
It could very well be, that Obama has driven the Independents squarely into the conservative’s camp. That’s a much more likely event than your mad max porn thing.
Camus was both right and wrong in ‘The Myth of Sisyphus’.
He was right that there is little meaning but what we make for ourselves in life, and he was wrong to discount out of hand that we might make lasting meaning through our efforts.
Therefore the dichotomy that he was interested in resolving (should realisation of lifes futility compell suicide) is a false one, for although he’s right that no outside observer or force lends meaning to our lives we do have opportunity to acheive things worth the effort rather than simply reconciling ourselves to death or emptiness.
And likewise the idea that U.S citizens have some sort of limited option to choose nihilism or, oh, I dunno, fascism is likewise not true.
People have the opportunity, have many opportunities, when faced with choices to pick a path that improves their own and others circumstances.
You are not Sisyphus – you can work together to hold the rock in place until youbuild a support to keep it where you will.
In may have taken centuries to learn, but we ought know be now that Greek myths are not all of truth.
Camus was both right and wrong in ‘The Myth of Sisyphus’.
He was right that there is little meaning but what we make for ourselves in life, and he was wrong to discount out of hand that we might make lasting meaning through our efforts.
Therefore the dichotomy that he was interested in resolving (should realisation of lifes futility compell suicide) is a false one, for although he’s right that no outside observer or force lends meaning to our lives we do have opportunity to acheive things worth the effort rather than simply reconciling ourselves to death or emptiness.
And likewise the idea that U.S citizens have some sort of limited option to choose nihilism or, oh, I dunno, fascism is likewise not true.
People have the opportunity, have many opportunities, when faced with choices to pick a path that improves their own and others circumstances.
You are not Sisyphus – you can work together to hold the rock in place until youbuild a support to keep it where you will.
In may have taken centuries to learn, but we ought know be now that Greek myths are not all of truth.
My friend, I wish I’d written every line. Any onlooker probably would find that sentiment fatuous and be slapped upside the head for disabuse.
Jeezus, the RFPs. I wish we could gather a good crew sometime, but the feds who let those pieces of shit are themselves shit-for-brains. It’s a disappointment of Jeffersonian dimensions, and it’s breaking the hearts of everyone I love. They either are cynical or incompetent or both.
My friend, I wish I’d written every line. Any onlooker probably would find that sentiment fatuous and be slapped upside the head for disabuse.
Jeezus, the RFPs. I wish we could gather a good crew sometime, but the feds who let those pieces of shit are themselves shit-for-brains. It’s a disappointment of Jeffersonian dimensions, and it’s breaking the hearts of everyone I love. They either are cynical or incompetent or both.
Only you would dare lead with “Heads on pikes!”. What exactly pisses you off today? I can’t quite tell.
You’re so compelling when you speak of defending, of healing, of loving.
Only you would dare lead with “Heads on pikes!”. What exactly pisses you off today? I can’t quite tell.
You’re so compelling when you speak of defending, of healing, of loving.
Amber, dump the redneck schtick, you’re brilliant.
Hugo, as a born again cynic, I can only suggest that if the bodies are properly tarred, they’ll last a long time in the gibbet.
I’m thinking that there are too many poisoned with hatred who simply have to die to be reborn…hopefully a level up the karma spiral. Even Ms. Palin seems to have sold out to Rush…it’s OK for him to call people “retards” now…but only him.
What weird times we do endure…
What chaos we insure…
When the right is pointing left,
Our hearts will be bereft.
When the left is pointing right,
Our minds will be a-fright…
Interregnum…a dark before a dawn…
We hope.
Fentex, I think that’s what I was getting at, but you put it much more coherently. In my reading of Camus, the emphasis was not on the futility, but on gaining meaning from the work. Hence, I won’t make a leap of faith that the Tea Party or Big Green Help will save the world, but I don’t think that saying ’screw it we’re all doomed anyway grab everything you can and hole up behind a fence’ is the answer either. So, I don’t jump on the bandwagon of the BGH, but my work in life (such as it is) attempts to hold the rock in place.
@ Hugo: Thank you for the compliment. I am a dying subspecies (rednecks who read).
In ‘Myth’ Camus’ “leap of faith” was toward religion. I’m wondering if, with the secularization of our society (U.S./western), radical nationalism and other isms (environmentalisms) are becoming a substitute.
I wonder because Jon (and many others) put a great deal of faith into the notion that, if we could simply stop spending money on the MIC (assuming that’s even possible), federal or state-run green/infrastructure projects initiatives in the model of FDR’s WPA will go a long way towards solving some of the problems that are wreaking havoc with the country.
I’m not sure this is the case. I’ve ranted with the rest of you on the subject of corporate greed, the 1% serving themselves (as stockholders) before their customers and their employees, and so on, but this type of behavior is not limited to private (or even publicly held) corporations.
Public works projects from the local to the national level are subject to their own particular brand of corruption resulting from greed, cronyism, nepotism, and plain old incompetence. Unless the notion of altruistic civic duty is somehow restored (and will that just be another ‘leap of faith’?) and unless homo sapiens americanus can somehow evolve into the rational actor of Warstler’s dreams, I have a really hard time envisioning any ‘good stuff’ happening on a large scale. It’s going to have to happen at the edges, one human at a time.
My feeling is that financially, and in every other way, people will always support what they want to hear. They will not support what they don’t want to hear.
Back in the day when the cold war was still in the air I was cycling around Europe and wasstaying one day at a hostel I had a conversation with a British tank squaddie who told me a story about a meeting he had with a Warsaw pact tank crew in then divided Berlin…
A Eastern Eurpoean trooper told him that he saw little differecne between the lies populations were told o neither side fo the curtain – in the East they were told what authorities wanted them to hear, in the West we are told what authorities think we want to hear.
In both cases there is no effort or reward for telling the truth.
That’s very neat, Rick, and clear.
The House’s healthcare bill actually refers to retards. That compendious bill is a lazy cut-and-paste job. Hence the resurrection of an odious archaism. So it’s not just Limbaugh–who, come to think of it, is a bit cut-and-paste himself.
Seriously how can people still be so callous? Even our congressional staff?
I pray to God Almighty that there will be no more of Warstler’s brand of “rational actors” than the number represented by him himself. I kind of doubt, kind of integrating what I’ve read of his stuff here, that he really even WANTS that “Free Market utopia,” unless it happens to come with a Trojan Horse with a Trap Door in it that lets him inside the citadel with a sharp sword and a dagger… cuz his version of all those people standing around “voluntarily contracting” with one another with some magical “government” watching carefully to be sure no one Coerces or Defrauds and nothing else, does not sound to me like any kind of Paradise most folks would want to live in.
Altruism is there in our limbic systems, the psychobabblers tell us, their carefully designed experiments “prove” that it’s biological, and our own experiences say it’s so. But it’s such a small aprt of what humans are capable of and what we the Top Predators have more than amply demonstrated that we can do, with gusto and rationalization and faith that God Himself or Herself put us to the task.
Meantime, I’ll go with fentex’s take on Camus and old Sisyphus, who was foolish enough to go against the Gods. Find your meaning in small things right around you, kill anything that starts getting too large, beyond “human” scale. That includes the MIC and the Overbrain that is part of it. Wonder what Freud would have to say about that particular manifestation of the superego?
Saw a cartoon in the Sunday funnies, maybe it will give you a laugh, or a cry…http://www.gocomics.com/nonsequitur/2010/02/07/
What evil lurks in the minds of “rational men?” The Shadow knows… Nahahahahahahahah…
And there’s a whole shitload of wealth to cream off if you are one of the arms industry arbitrageurs tranching away at the rest of us who just want a quiet life… If you read enough of the trade pubs and advblurbs of the war makers, you have to come away with the understanding that those people play together in their own sandbox, share the cookies and brownies they steal from the other kids, and talk a different dialect that sneers at the people who fund their not only totally unproductive activities (and spare me the shit about how all this wonderful new technology is a result — put the same money into stuff that doesn’t zap or blam or e-e-e-e-eKRABOOM and gee, what would have maybe come out of that?) but eventually totally destructive activities. Shiva, move over — BoeingBoforsLockheedmartinetc. is on the case…
Stupid humans. Too bad the rads will eventually kill the bears, too — they are more sympathetic, to me at least, than tubeworms in the ocean trenches and cockroaches eating the rats, after the rats pick our carcasses clean. Why does the History Channel’s “Life After People” series not show any skeletons, let alone rotting bodies, in their pretty visions of What Comes After? Bring it a little too close to feeling like the Next Rational Reality?
And there’s a whole shitload of wealth to cream off if you are one of the arms industry arbitrageurs tranching away at the rest of us who just want a quiet life… If you read enough of the trade pubs and advblurbs of the war makers, you have to come away with the understanding that those people play together in their own sandbox, share the cookies and brownies they steal from the other kids, and talk a different dialect that sneers at the people who fund their not only totally unproductive activities (and spare me the shit about how all this wonderful new technology is a result — put the same money into stuff that doesn’t zap or blam or e-e-e-e-eKRABOOM and gee, what would have maybe come out of that?) but eventually totally destructive activities. Shiva, move over — BoeingBoforsLockheedmartinetc. is on the case…
Stupid humans. Too bad the rads will eventually kill the bears, too — they are more sympathetic, to me at least, than tubeworms in the ocean trenches and cockroaches eating the rats, after the rats pick our carcasses clean. Why does the History Channel’s “Life After People” series not show any skeletons, let alone rotting bodies, in their pretty visions of What Comes After? Bring it a little too close to feeling like the Next Rational Reality?
Haunting, Fentex. Deeply Orwellian. Jon teaches about propganda. Perhaps he’ll incorporate your story. It strikes me as definitive of propaganda because propaganda’s inverse is to tell the truth regardless of whether people welcome it. You’re describing obverse coinages; I’d never considered propaganda with two faces, but I should have seen the happy face of it revealed in the Progressive satirists of the ’20s. That is indeed what they were saying, that dictating and pandering can be equally manipulative and false.
That’s too much to say, but I think I’ll never forget your story.
Haunting, Fentex. Deeply Orwellian. Jon teaches about propganda. Perhaps he’ll incorporate your story. It strikes me as definitive of propaganda because propaganda’s inverse is to tell the truth regardless of whether people welcome it. You’re describing obverse coinages; I’d never considered propaganda with two faces, but I should have seen the happy face of it revealed in the Progressive satirists of the ’20s. That is indeed what they were saying, that dictating and pandering can be equally manipulative and false.
That’s too much to say, but I think I’ll never forget your story.
Jon, it’s not just these relatively young men who are out of jobs, with few prospects, it’s also anyone over 45 to 50. Take a look around the office or look at employment rolls. Every corp. for a long time has been hiring 20-somethings. They may not have the ideal amount of experience, but they are cheap! And since the cost of employment is the biggest portion of a corporate budget, hiring the least expensive worker ho has a bare minimum of experience becomes a requirement. Ina risk/benefit analysis, the company feels it can deal with even costly errors better than hiring a far more expensive, highly experienced, older worker.
Yes, I know, especially in the tech industries, the argument that young managers are uncomfortable supervising older workers (a la son telling dad what to do, or telling dad he’s wrong and to do a particular job or task the son’s way). And there is some truth to that. But I’ve also seen it work well…so well, in fact, that both productivity and efficiency increased.
As one of those “older, experienced” workers, I’m finding myself locked out the current job market. That is a situation, I don’t expect will change any time in the next few years. That situation, affecting millions of experienced older workers, is also having a deleterious effect on the national conversation simply because these older, angry people have the perceive benefit of experience and history on their side, i.e. dad’s been around a lot longer than I so maybe I should listen to him or he knows more about politics and the economy than I do so maybe he’s right.
Palin, et al, are preying upon people’s fears as we all know. They’re using it for their own political and economic gain. However, the Dems, in their celebral, “gee, it just makes so much sense that anyone can see it” approach have failed miserably to define the problem and refine the solution message. Moreover, the total breach of political trust combined with Repub gamesmanship has caused the populous to despair that anything good can come out of Washington.
As one of the millions of older Americans who cannot find a job, I pent much of today reading economic tracts, editorials, and blogs, including those written by Bruce Barlett, Reagan’s chief economic adviser, who voted for Obama and chose to become an Independent. Now writing for Forbes, he acknowledges that Obama made serious mistakes in his appointments, in not crafting a clear message the defined the problems and his solutions in ways the American populace could understand (a la Pres. Reagan), not making financial reform and jobs the first and primary issues addressed,and separating himself more definitively from Bush policies, but he believes that Obama’s are essentially the correct policies for the country. He also ripped the Repub party for their failure to participate, their obstructionism, and their pandering to the extremists.
Each and everyone of the moderate economists whom I read today stated the same thing:
- tax reductions during a severe recession such as this one do nothing to stimulate the economy;
-gov’t is the spender of last resort to keep the economy from becoming even worse;
- that taxes must be raised and spending cut to deal with the deficit in the long term;
- that Medicare spending must be brought under control, given the huge unfunded increase in spending by the Bush Admin. & Repub Congress that *will* break the federal government;
- that military spending as a percentage of GDP must be reduced;
- that new financial regulations must be advanced to deal insure that the boom and busts like previous decade are avoided as well as insuring all shadow banking and currently unregulated financial products are out in the open so risks/benefits can be understood;
- that the major goal of health care reform should be “bending the cost curve” not increasing the numbers of insured;
- that exports historically supported the national economy – and reduced or eliminated the deficit – and needs to once again through free trade – that is, through limiting or eliminating export and import barriers and opening markets to our exports – to spur the economy, increase manufacturing, and thus increase hiring;
- and finally all economists state clearly that until the both Dems and Repubs change their partisan ideologies and the playing of political games to solve the current economic woes of the country the economy will continue to be sluggish for years to come.
All of them stated that neither a “tax and spend” policy or a “cut taxes and spend” policy works. You can’t just tax the rich (ie corporations) and expect to solve the budget crisis *and* increase employment nor can you cut taxes and expect the deficit to decline without cutting endeared programs such as Medicare and the Military.
As Barlett stated in his Forbes blog as well as in his most recent two books, what worked in the past does not necessarily work now. The world has changed and our policies must change also; living in the past (i.e. the Reagan or Johnson eras) does not solve the problems of today.
New ideas must be forged, including taking into account new economic theories based on behavioral economics, to deal with financial regulation, export and trade barriers, tax regulations and structures, and rebuilding our vital infrastructure in order to economically compete. While few of them specifically noted the need for vital, educated immigrants to spur innovation here as well as spread the message of (little “d”)democracy abroad, that was a given from their previous writings.
Moreover, each has written about the absolute requirement of better education. The new economy we’re entering requires an understanding of technology so our workers must be educated, at the very least, to understand technology, be it software, hardware, or biotech.
To accomplish the task of better equipping workers, schools need to change from the ideology of “teaching to the least able” – that is, dumbing down classes to those least able to keep up – to raising the educational bar and accelerating classes for those who are capable of going faster and farther. Change the system from one that rewards seniority to one that rewards results…and hire better by making teaching a financially competitive career move.
But to be able to accomplish what these economists say is necessary to rebuild our economy requires moderates and independents to demand better from our politicians. The fringes cannot win if the middle holds the electoral power. Moreover, the middle can demand and win, through their electoral power, the funding of campaigns and the elimination of lobbyist monies if they choose. One example of quid pro quo is Sen. McConnell. One of his major campaign contributors is a subsidiary of a foreign company that deals, I believe, in defense contracts. He recently, through earmarks, designated millions of taxpayer money to that company. In other words, it appeared to be a case of “you scratch my back (financially) and I scratch yours.”
I can hear Jefferson and Adams now, bellowing in print, at this wrong. Even Hamilton would be ashamed and writing long tracts of opposition in his NY newspapers.
Okay, I’ll get off my soapbox now. Just please go out and research, read, and educate everyone around you. Defeat ignorance with knowledge. ’nuff said.
Jon, it’s not just these relatively young men who are out of jobs, with few prospects, it’s also anyone over 45 to 50. Take a look around the office or look at employment rolls. Every corp. for a long time has been hiring 20-somethings. They may not have the ideal amount of experience, but they are cheap! And since the cost of employment is the biggest portion of a corporate budget, hiring the least expensive worker ho has a bare minimum of experience becomes a requirement. Ina risk/benefit analysis, the company feels it can deal with even costly errors better than hiring a far more expensive, highly experienced, older worker.
Yes, I know, especially in the tech industries, the argument that young managers are uncomfortable supervising older workers (a la son telling dad what to do, or telling dad he’s wrong and to do a particular job or task the son’s way). And there is some truth to that. But I’ve also seen it work well…so well, in fact, that both productivity and efficiency increased.
As one of those “older, experienced” workers, I’m finding myself locked out the current job market. That is a situation, I don’t expect will change any time in the next few years. That situation, affecting millions of experienced older workers, is also having a deleterious effect on the national conversation simply because these older, angry people have the perceive benefit of experience and history on their side, i.e. dad’s been around a lot longer than I so maybe I should listen to him or he knows more about politics and the economy than I do so maybe he’s right.
Palin, et al, are preying upon people’s fears as we all know. They’re using it for their own political and economic gain. However, the Dems, in their celebral, “gee, it just makes so much sense that anyone can see it” approach have failed miserably to define the problem and refine the solution message. Moreover, the total breach of political trust combined with Repub gamesmanship has caused the populous to despair that anything good can come out of Washington.
As one of the millions of older Americans who cannot find a job, I pent much of today reading economic tracts, editorials, and blogs, including those written by Bruce Barlett, Reagan’s chief economic adviser, who voted for Obama and chose to become an Independent. Now writing for Forbes, he acknowledges that Obama made serious mistakes in his appointments, in not crafting a clear message the defined the problems and his solutions in ways the American populace could understand (a la Pres. Reagan), not making financial reform and jobs the first and primary issues addressed,and separating himself more definitively from Bush policies, but he believes that Obama’s are essentially the correct policies for the country. He also ripped the Repub party for their failure to participate, their obstructionism, and their pandering to the extremists.
Each and everyone of the moderate economists whom I read today stated the same thing:
- tax reductions during a severe recession such as this one do nothing to stimulate the economy;
-gov’t is the spender of last resort to keep the economy from becoming even worse;
- that taxes must be raised and spending cut to deal with the deficit in the long term;
- that Medicare spending must be brought under control, given the huge unfunded increase in spending by the Bush Admin. & Repub Congress that *will* break the federal government;
- that military spending as a percentage of GDP must be reduced;
- that new financial regulations must be advanced to deal insure that the boom and busts like previous decade are avoided as well as insuring all shadow banking and currently unregulated financial products are out in the open so risks/benefits can be understood;
- that the major goal of health care reform should be “bending the cost curve” not increasing the numbers of insured;
- that exports historically supported the national economy – and reduced or eliminated the deficit – and needs to once again through free trade – that is, through limiting or eliminating export and import barriers and opening markets to our exports – to spur the economy, increase manufacturing, and thus increase hiring;
- and finally all economists state clearly that until the both Dems and Repubs change their partisan ideologies and the playing of political games to solve the current economic woes of the country the economy will continue to be sluggish for years to come.
All of them stated that neither a “tax and spend” policy or a “cut taxes and spend” policy works. You can’t just tax the rich (ie corporations) and expect to solve the budget crisis *and* increase employment nor can you cut taxes and expect the deficit to decline without cutting endeared programs such as Medicare and the Military.
As Barlett stated in his Forbes blog as well as in his most recent two books, what worked in the past does not necessarily work now. The world has changed and our policies must change also; living in the past (i.e. the Reagan or Johnson eras) does not solve the problems of today.
New ideas must be forged, including taking into account new economic theories based on behavioral economics, to deal with financial regulation, export and trade barriers, tax regulations and structures, and rebuilding our vital infrastructure in order to economically compete. While few of them specifically noted the need for vital, educated immigrants to spur innovation here as well as spread the message of (little “d”)democracy abroad, that was a given from their previous writings.
Moreover, each has written about the absolute requirement of better education. The new economy we’re entering requires an understanding of technology so our workers must be educated, at the very least, to understand technology, be it software, hardware, or biotech.
To accomplish the task of better equipping workers, schools need to change from the ideology of “teaching to the least able” – that is, dumbing down classes to those least able to keep up – to raising the educational bar and accelerating classes for those who are capable of going faster and farther. Change the system from one that rewards seniority to one that rewards results…and hire better by making teaching a financially competitive career move.
But to be able to accomplish what these economists say is necessary to rebuild our economy requires moderates and independents to demand better from our politicians. The fringes cannot win if the middle holds the electoral power. Moreover, the middle can demand and win, through their electoral power, the funding of campaigns and the elimination of lobbyist monies if they choose. One example of quid pro quo is Sen. McConnell. One of his major campaign contributors is a subsidiary of a foreign company that deals, I believe, in defense contracts. He recently, through earmarks, designated millions of taxpayer money to that company. In other words, it appeared to be a case of “you scratch my back (financially) and I scratch yours.”
I can hear Jefferson and Adams now, bellowing in print, at this wrong. Even Hamilton would be ashamed and writing long tracts of opposition in his NY newspapers.
Okay, I’ll get off my soapbox now. Just please go out and research, read, and educate everyone around you. Defeat ignorance with knowledge. ’nuff said.
Amber, you’re asking the very questions that animated my doctoral studies 25 years ago, and I just want to tell you that to help take the starch out of my shirt and to salute you as a bookish redneck self-described. I wish not to posture, but I do think your questions astute.
The scientific study of religion is largely concerned with the phenomenon of secularization. You might glimpse, for example, at how few Israelis adhere (not identify with, but adhere to) Judaism, how few Irish to Catholicism. This line of research, from the phenomenologists, indicates modernization as the driver of doubt or indifference. OK. Duh.
When you turn to orthodox Sociology you find the study of “civil religion”, precisely the phenomenon you intuit: a kind of spiritual replacement, somewhat like the drug experiments of the ’60s. The term “civil religion” was coined at UC Berkeley, but if you really want to know how right you probably are you’ll look at the work done at Tel Aviv U. on German National Socialism as a radical, calculated transference of faith from church to state. Mein Kampf is in fact the tell.
So that accounts for the social sciences. As for the Humanities, if you haven’t already done so I’d invite you to look at what the ascerbic Dane Soren Kierkegaard was writing about this, often hilariously, circa 1855. He saw it coming, the whole stupid Nietzschean cul-de-sac of state worship.
You’re really onto something.
Amber, you’re asking the very questions that animated my doctoral studies 25 years ago, and I just want to tell you that to help take the starch out of my shirt and to salute you as a bookish redneck self-described. I wish not to posture, but I do think your questions astute.
The scientific study of religion is largely concerned with the phenomenon of secularization. You might glimpse, for example, at how few Israelis adhere (not identify with, but adhere to) Judaism, how few Irish to Catholicism. This line of research, from the phenomenologists, indicates modernization as the driver of doubt or indifference. OK. Duh.
When you turn to orthodox Sociology you find the study of “civil religion”, precisely the phenomenon you intuit: a kind of spiritual replacement, somewhat like the drug experiments of the ’60s. The term “civil religion” was coined at UC Berkeley, but if you really want to know how right you probably are you’ll look at the work done at Tel Aviv U. on German National Socialism as a radical, calculated transference of faith from church to state. Mein Kampf is in fact the tell.
So that accounts for the social sciences. As for the Humanities, if you haven’t already done so I’d invite you to look at what the ascerbic Dane Soren Kierkegaard was writing about this, often hilariously, circa 1855. He saw it coming, the whole stupid Nietzschean cul-de-sac of state worship.
You’re really onto something.
I can hear them too, VC, and you. It’s frightening to be haunted by the future.
Please don’t find this caustic, as I mean it so sincerely, but I just can’t believe how this exquisitely competent country is cultivating incompetence on every dimension. It pools in the public sector but it spreads across the board. How to stop it? It must be stopped.
I can hear them too, VC, and you. It’s frightening to be haunted by the future.
Please don’t find this caustic, as I mean it so sincerely, but I just can’t believe how this exquisitely competent country is cultivating incompetence on every dimension. It pools in the public sector but it spreads across the board. How to stop it? It must be stopped.
The problem with Classical Chicago economics and the myth of the Rational Actor is that people all make the same mistakes after they’ve taken a measure of the world.
They immediately bend their measurements to their biases.
After Adam Smith lead the way economists got serious about measuring the world and we’ve learned important facts from them, but the prescriptions that are then made do not follow from the observed facts.
Supply, demand, price fluctuations are all observed but the explanation of them (Rational Actors et al) are not observed, they are theorised and promulgated by arguments supported by bigoted belief rather than direct connection to empirical evidence.
An easy way to disprove a persons commitment to Rational Actors and Libertarain free markets is to ask them to truly commit to the concept and give up all their property (along with everyone else) for redistribution in equal amounts (thus correcting all that horrible pre-existing priviledge and unfair distribution they proclaim to hate so much) in return for an opportuntiy to compete in future on equal terms.
Few people will honestly make such a commitment, many because they are (as is typical of people who make the argument) of above average wealth in this world but more importantly because there can be no honest gaurantee of equal opportunity to compete.
Both the Libertarian Rational Actor argument and the counter offer of a level playing field are lies which only a fool would commit to.
The problem with Classical Chicago economics and the myth of the Rational Actor is that people all make the same mistakes after they’ve taken a measure of the world.
They immediately bend their measurements to their biases.
After Adam Smith lead the way economists got serious about measuring the world and we’ve learned important facts from them, but the prescriptions that are then made do not follow from the observed facts.
Supply, demand, price fluctuations are all observed but the explanation of them (Rational Actors et al) are not observed, they are theorised and promulgated by arguments supported by bigoted belief rather than direct connection to empirical evidence.
An easy way to disprove a persons commitment to Rational Actors and Libertarain free markets is to ask them to truly commit to the concept and give up all their property (along with everyone else) for redistribution in equal amounts (thus correcting all that horrible pre-existing priviledge and unfair distribution they proclaim to hate so much) in return for an opportuntiy to compete in future on equal terms.
Few people will honestly make such a commitment, many because they are (as is typical of people who make the argument) of above average wealth in this world but more importantly because there can be no honest gaurantee of equal opportunity to compete.
Both the Libertarian Rational Actor argument and the counter offer of a level playing field are lies which only a fool would commit to.
And that’s exactly what every economist wrote…and one of many reasons why Barlett is so angry with his former party.
So, call me a cock-eyed optimist, but I believe we moderates and independents can change things in this country if we shout loud enough, using facts, data and research, and a clear message. We can defeat ignorance. Madison, Hamilton, and John Jay overcame ignorance, special interests, suspicion and misconceptions to convince the populace to ratify the Constitution. Why should anyone think that we cannot do the same now?
And that’s exactly what every economist wrote…and one of many reasons why Barlett is so angry with his former party.
So, call me a cock-eyed optimist, but I believe we moderates and independents can change things in this country if we shout loud enough, using facts, data and research, and a clear message. We can defeat ignorance. Madison, Hamilton, and John Jay overcame ignorance, special interests, suspicion and misconceptions to convince the populace to ratify the Constitution. Why should anyone think that we cannot do the same now?
Fentex:
It’s a great story and a cute line, but I still prefer authorities who at least pretend to care what citizens think. If you want to measure the results in dollars and cents — or marks and pfennigs — the difference is pretty striking.
And for those who, like me, doubt money as the measure of all things, the spiritual deficit is well expressed by writers as different as Solzhenitzen and Havel.
Fentex:
It’s a great story and a cute line, but I still prefer authorities who at least pretend to care what citizens think. If you want to measure the results in dollars and cents — or marks and pfennigs — the difference is pretty striking.
And for those who, like me, doubt money as the measure of all things, the spiritual deficit is well expressed by writers as different as Solzhenitzen and Havel.
That’s so right, and stirring, VC. If I could join with you somehow I’d pledge to plug daily. I really think that the whole country would be smart to get behind wounded California, but shit I’ll start wherever you choose. I realize you’re busy, but it’s time to stand up and Fight.
That’s so right, and stirring, VC. If I could join with you somehow I’d pledge to plug daily. I really think that the whole country would be smart to get behind wounded California, but shit I’ll start wherever you choose. I realize you’re busy, but it’s time to stand up and Fight.
No, heads-on-pikes, altruism is not ingrained or written, but the bankruptcy of of the soul is, as proven, so you need not persist lest you might inform us as how to resurrect. You’re serious; answer this seriously, please. JTM, truly I dion’t want to offend you but I want to refer you to the theological term acedia. In Thomism it means a willful suicide of the soul. Thomas guessed that this was the ultimate sin.
I’m not laying a trip on you; just trying to convey some powerful Catholicism whereas I myself am not Catholic.
No, heads-on-pikes, altruism is not ingrained or written, but the bankruptcy of of the soul is, as proven, so you need not persist lest you might inform us as how to resurrect. You’re serious; answer this seriously, please. JTM, truly I dion’t want to offend you but I want to refer you to the theological term acedia. In Thomism it means a willful suicide of the soul. Thomas guessed that this was the ultimate sin.
I’m not laying a trip on you; just trying to convey some powerful Catholicism whereas I myself am not Catholic.
Probably because I’ve read most of that stuff, even though I’m not a PhD. These thoughts are not new, they just keep bubbling to the surface in different forms and in different words as I grow older, read more stuff, experience more stuff, and see more newer kinds of bad behavior.
The problem with being (largely) an autodidact is that you can ignore the works of those with whom you disagree. I try not to do that. Wish I could say the same for Warstler.
Probably because I’ve read most of that stuff, even though I’m not a PhD. These thoughts are not new, they just keep bubbling to the surface in different forms and in different words as I grow older, read more stuff, experience more stuff, and see more newer kinds of bad behavior.
The problem with being (largely) an autodidact is that you can ignore the works of those with whom you disagree. I try not to do that. Wish I could say the same for Warstler.
The problem with the internet is that people can’t see when your tongue is firmly planted in your cheek. I don’t believe humans are rational actors or ever will be. I think ‘rational actor’ is an artificial construct used to prop up an inherently flawed economic system.
Amber got an A in Murray Rothbard’s class (I’m not completely uneducated).
The problem with the internet is that people can’t see when your tongue is firmly planted in your cheek. I don’t believe humans are rational actors or ever will be. I think ‘rational actor’ is an artificial construct used to prop up an inherently flawed economic system.
Amber got an A in Murray Rothbard’s class (I’m not completely uneducated).
Valerie, you’ve written a concise and comprehensible manifesto for what needs to get done in the country and managed to remain optimistic in the process. Kudos. Now, if you could just land a job in the Administration…
Nothing is a lay-down putdown in this world, where free will or not, humans do what they do. Maybe my soul is dead, maybe there’s “intelligent design,” maybe the people that extol greed and hegemony and guns over butter are “right” in more than the political-wing sense.
Google returns, all 335,000 of them, indicate that the biological basis of altruism (and ethics in the positive sense, and greed and such) is still a hotly debated and very open issue between a lot of often very sharp but very closed minds. But with a substantial set of people taking the evidence to satisfy the notion that for at least some of us, some of the time, with respect to some set of fellow humans, there’s reason to believe that biology, the wiring of the brain, or messages it receives from the soul, has a lot to do with selfless behavior.
Here’s just a snippet of the words in play, with some interesting observations salted in: “The only social policies that have a reasonable chance of long-term success are those that are compatible with human nature [whatever that is].” See the first page of the rest, coming from a Neo-Confucian, whatever that might be, at http://www.springerlink.com/content/y094651pr100j1g0/
I’ll see your acedia, which has a wide range of freight-of-meaning, and raise you an anomie. Speaking of dead men walking…
As an example of what’s in play and what’s at stake, there’s a considerable body of thinking about how big the Arab/Muslim “middle class” is or might be or ought to be, and how a larger group with a bigger stake in “making it” might cut the nuts off the nihilists committing Jihadicide after imbibing too much of the heady despair and hope of 72-virgin “salvation” peddled by the Mad Mullahs. Like this stuff. But of course “we” have little to no interest in fostering any such “industrial middle class,” now do we?
And my sense is that The Middle is necessary for stability and continued existence of the nation and species, but that the few folks still there are either anomie-ing their acedia in their fall down the ladder of Success, or are standing on the shoulders of others ejected from the Titanic to grab the last spots in the lifeboats or at least another gulp or three of air.
“It’s frightening to be haunted by the future.” Hugo
That haunting has been ever increasing, and two years ago, a little known US Senator from Illinois used it as a catalyst to propel him into the White House. A year after his historic inauguration and many feel disappointed, betrayed and angry. The hope captured by his campaign web site continues to fade as the haunting grows ever stronger.
I repeatedly implored the interventionists to regard Mr. Obama less like a Messiah and more like a politician, albeit with above average charisma and public speaking skills. His lack of credible experience meant it was highly unlikely he would realize his grand, let alone his lesser expectations. A year later, and this is no longer in dispute. He simply can’t achieve what he and we would like him to achieve. But enough about Mr. Obama, it’s time to move on.
Although the parties and corporations would like us to think otherwise, we are both the problem and the solution. We’ve ceded far too much for an air conditioner and a microwave. We’ve become a culture of dolts who put comfort above all else, and our politicians and corporations pander to it incessantly. But our vote still decides their fate. The public decides who represents them and which products and services survive.
Restoring meaningful employment, not initiatives like health care reform, was and continues to be Mr. Obama’s greatest challenge. Many today are hurting in ways they never imagined, and the unspoken truth is that no one knows when we’ll see “normalcy” again.
The culprit of course is globalization. The dislocation which began several decades ago with the shipping of blue collar manufacturing jobs overseas has now reached the point where almost any task can be done cheaper by someone else, somewhere else and delivered without any meaningful interruption. It seems that no one is “safe” anymore.
What Ms. Curl describes isn’t globalization’s latest ripple. Corporations began to purge their white collar ranks in earnest during the 1990 – 92′ recession. Hundreds of thousands of tenured professionals received pink slips, many lost homes and savings, and many faced the brutal reality of having to start over in their late-40’s to mid-50’s.
What can be done? Recognize the motivations and limitations of those entrusted with our trust and reward and discard accordingly.
Of the two, corporations are typically more adept to changing customer preferences than politicians. They’re also better at creating preferences where they didn’t exist before. The “go green” movement seems to be a good testimonial to this. It would also seem that Nov 2010 shouldn’t be kind to incumbents. But it all depends on who shows up, the dolts or the doers, those seeking comfort or those willing to work. Neither party is virtuous in this regard, each are more than willing to placate for donations, than to toil for the better good.
One nice thing about corporate agilty is that they can lumber along and use the tools of marketing to manufacture demand for more useless shit to put in the basement, garage or storage locker. How many of us got a Bowflex working as a clothes rack or dust magnet? But hey, the ads say that at 57 you can have the rocker bod of a 22-year-old bedroom-Marathonner-cum-recreational-drug-sponge – just 4 payments of 99.99, plus shipping and handling…
And ask Gingrich and Rove and Carvill and Matalin and those folks whether or not politicians have to be nimble enough to run around in front of the herd, whichever way it wanders, to be “leaders,” like Stennis and Kennedy and who’s that old prune from North Carolina, Jesse-at-the-Helms? Master of manufactured hate-filled sentiments? Booster par excellence for the Strong Military MIC? Or whether there’s the vulnerability in the minimally educated brains of America’s uncitizenized “consumers” to be led around by the nose ring.
“There are tides in the affairs of men” that produce some Perfect Storm waves. Looks to me like Surf’s Up! To the beach with the board, or head for high ground?
You’re right that that’s the main peril for autodidacts, though Lincoln managed to avoid the pitfall. A corresponding danger, for the overschooled, is that they tend to imitate a particular mentor and then to read and opine sycophantically. Either way, a narrowing self-confirmation. Strange as it may sound I was a didact who studied autodidacticism. At the time it seemed to make sense.
Please continue your thinking about cooptation of the religious impulse. With every passing year it seems more important. Consider the trapline in the U.S. alone: from New Jerusalem to Square Deal to New Deal to New Frontier to Great Society to a shining City on a Hill. Full circle. That’s how virulent.
This is a reply to the comment above from anonymous. It should be noted there no reply link provided for the comment. Whether it be acedia or anomie, it cannot be denied that there is much to think about the vast belly that the middle class represents not only here in the US of A’s but as you so neatly placed them there in the center of what to do in Islamaland about the virgin seeking suicides.
I have long posited that we should be talking about denial which the psyche places like a wall between itself and any actual reality. On one side of the wall, itself, content with it’s politics, it’s religion, it’s place at the center of the known universe, and on the other side the reality of everyone else. Calamity forces denial. Weakness of spirit yeilds to it. And most of the time, it appears to the person in denial as some sort of great strength. Hence, those adamant Tea Partiers so convinced they’re in the right place.
What this may have to do with people (men, I guess) out of Work is expressed in the words, “Geez, I never saw that coming.” No idea that raising the price of houses so that your status went through the roof could actually mean you’d lose touch with the floor of expenses you were standing on. No clue that voting for a larger and larger and larger military complex would actually put your country at risk. No understanding how dragging your country through an endless debate would filibuster any chance of progress or success.
It enough to give a person a real sense of anomie.
Anonymous, not to be obscurantist but you remind me of Aquinas on acedia.
Murray Rothbard! How cool. What a wonderful iconoclast!
rhbee, Amen.
Hugo, I had him for an honors seminar “Politics, Religion, & Economics”. It was amazing.
I don’t know why I was reported as “Anonymous.” Obnoxious, maybe. I got no problem taking responsibility for what I say and do, and I haven’t used “mistakes were made” or issued a phony apology since Momma used the Dial soap instead of the Lifebuoy in my attempted-to-get-away-with-lying mouth, way back in Eisenhower’s time.
But Acedia goes down best with a cocktail of hemock and wormwood. With a beer chaser.
And may a thousand angels dance on the heads of every pin in your pincushion.
That was my “anonymous,” I have no idea how my name left the page. God acting, maybe?
My refuge is the Golden Rule, and that sucker-bait stuff I internalized back in Boy Scout days, from truly model scoutmasters and sense of fundamental rightness of the notions, undimmed by subsequent experience. To the point that I am enough of a “freier” to pick up and put in the trash other people’s dogs’ shit and their cigarette butts and gum wrappers, and if a cellophane wrapper escapes my grasp, I’ll chase it down and dump it “properly.” Knowing that it will likely blow out of the trash truck or end up “away” in a landfill forever. Speaking of Sisyphus…
Trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean and reverent. There’s a 12-step program for us all, and I figure in my case 5 or 6 out of 12 is a passing grade.
Whoops! time for my “Two Minute Hate!”
JTM, wasn’t attempting to diagnose you with the affliction, acedia; was likening your sentiments to Thomistic observations on that score. It seems to me that Thomas construed acedia as the willful suicide of the soul, as nothing less than the Unforgivable Sin. It seems now that you see the U.S. committing that sin collectively. A willful suicide of the national spirit, a rejection of the greatest gift of our birth.
Fentex- I don’t know why I missed your post the first time through.You are spot on. You brought me back to reading “The Stranger”.
Amber- I think you have to get the public works project down to the scale of the neighborhood to avoid corruption. The words I am hearing bandied about are “financial subsidiarity”–meaning push the project to the lowest level of government possible.
Valerie- You are so right. “Roll over Jefferson”
Perhaps the U.S should import the expertise in constructive micro-loans helpful entrepenuers have been developing in Asia and Africa.
OK. That might have a shot. Might.