Good reminder of the Leno segment. It just seems worse when it is happening in a college classroom. But then again, I remember a college freshman approaching me in college to help him with his geography homework. He asked me where Vietnam was. This was 1977.
People have gotten out of the mainstream news habit and it’s not replicated well on the social media people actually use. I get it — morning network news shows are like infomercials. They actually have the anchors selling products and the guests are PR placements. The nightly news is just shrieking. As for newspapers, I wish people would read those — even the New York Post would have details on Yevgeny Prigozhin.
The thing is: this IS very serious times because climate change is happening, Gun shootings are so common and I hear next year they are going to CUT. Social Security which many people desperately need. And…there a threat to our democracy if Donald Trump wins again. Yes, we live in precarious times.
Your commentary reminds me of a quote attributed to the author/ entertainer Garrison Keillor .....
“ The purpose of civil government is not to seek revenge against the people we imagine think they are better than us.”
Our elected leaders ( regardless of political party affiliation) are unable to arrive at consensus and seemingly are inclined to find a boogeyman around every corner. Most of today’s politics consist of a pervasive attitude that all controversies must be a contest between “ them” against “us.”
The message that citizens should be sending to our local, statewide and national elected officials is that an attitude adjustment is in order. Where do we start?
The idea of ‘bothsidesism’ is a mask to cover the reason leaders can’t find consensus. The GOP in recent years gained the nickname ‘the Party of No’ for very real reason. It is a strategic decision to deny consensus on major issues in an attempt to claw back progressive gain on numerous issues since the Civil Rights movement.
If we are to find consensus we should start with recognition of that. Here’s a test, was the denial of Merrick Garland an up or down vote for a Supreme Court seat fair and just? Was it simply smart strategy? Or was it denial of rightful process?
Let us not forget that GWB lost the popular vote, only became president because of a SCOTUS a ruling that the justices were embarrassed at, and then he turned around and told the country that he had a mandate to drive conservative policy change. Was that bothsidesism? When GWB asked for authorization to use force saying that just having the authority was enough to intimidate Saddam Hussein, and many Democrats reluctantly voted to give him that authority IN THE SPIRIT OF FINDING CONSENSUS - then Bush lied his way into an illegal war in which his administration authorized war crimes - all while millions of Americans took to the streets in an attempt to prevent us from going to war - was that ‘both sides’?
NO. Denial of consensus falls heavily on the shoulders of the GOP.
And the GOP candidates for president stood on a stage and most of them said they would support their party candidate whoever it is! Even if it is a person who everybody knows in their hearts attempted a coup, and insurrection, sedition against the USA. Talk about breaking your Oath of Office!
So what consensus am I to find with people who will overthrow our government? Am I obligated to reduce my abhorrence of sedition and insurrection? Am I supposed to take it seriously when Proud Boys recite the Pledge of Allegiance on the street in Saratoga Springs?
Let’s stop pretending both sides are equally guilty in not finding consensus.
Things ARE getting better. But things don’t get better by accident, and too often we are ‘fixing’ problems the expensive way - when we are already deep in them and nobody can deny their existence. Foresight, planning, and well conceived action long before everyone concedes that what was once a problem on the horizon becomes a crisis of the moment is nice once in a while. Richard Nixon empowered a panel to study atmospheric warming. Jimmy Carter instituted economy standards for autos and tried to encourage green energy. Back when Mao was Chairman in China the USA could have been driving a worldwide clean energy future. We could have enriched ourselves while supplying clean power and technology to the world and massively improving lives of people in poor countries. Imagine if we had developed our economy in a way that enriched itself on 3rd World countries not at their expense, not by encouraging them to plunder their natural resources, not by selling them guns and bullets, but by helping them leapfrog past economies based on Mass Consumption and build clean, resilient communities able to sustain themselves and their traditions. We would very likely not have massive numbers of desperate people crowding our southern border, dying in deserts, drowning in the Mediterranean, using every last resource their families can muster to pay for escape only to die far from family and home, selling their kidneys and even their children to buy food for their families.
Instead people of vision are painted as alarmist nuts. Go ahead, tell me another Al Gore joke.
We tend to think that the way our system works is simply a natural thing, it just exists, but it isn’t. We are a Mass Consumer society because Mass Consumption has been basic US policy since not long after WW2 and it was used as a weapon of the Cold War. I’m not crating conspiracy theories here, I’m relating history. When you go to the store to buy a bigger TV, or a 2nd or 5th TV; when you buy a gas guzzling truck; when you buy or build a bigger house than you need and then you have to fill it with furniture, heat it, cool it, pay the taxes on it…, when you have some irrational desire to buy some stuff that you really do not need - that you know deep in your heart that you do not need - you are under the spell of economic theories and models developed when you were a child or long before you were born. I’m not making this up - see attached links. These ideas were misguided at the time and not sufficiently corrected since first becoming core economic policy.
So, yeah, our economy is very strong, we are (as a whole) rich in stuff. Our economy has been powerful enough to stem many of the problems Mass Consumption has created here and around the world. But there is a tipping point. We hover at it. Perhaps people will think I’m alarmist for saying so. Or, maybe they will read the attached links and do some research on their own. Maybe. Probably not.
Right on, Ken. As a pastoral theologian for more than sixty years, the politicians and others you describe I have come to refer to as “apocalyptic hopers”—they believe that the worse things get the better they are. Pessimism and negativism get us nowhere. We need to be realistic, to be sure, but misinformation and disinformation need to be recognized and confronted. Where love and justice prevail there is cause for authentic hope. (Justice, for me, is the public face of compassion).
In terms of uninformed youngsters, is it any worse than decades past? I recall a conversation probably 30 years ago when I was in my teens or early 20s, discussing ancestry. I explained that I was Jewish and German (2 different sides of the family) but this young man I was talking to was dumbfounded: “I didn’t know there were any Jews in Germany.” 😳.
One big detail is wrong, Ken. The class I posted about who know so little about current events was not at RPI, but at UAlbany. And they are not STEM majors; they are journalism students. And still, only three out of 60 could answer all five question about major news events of the past week.
I see so many online bits saying voter fraud is real, etc. I question the sources, etc and have noticed the lies that are taking root around me. I also recall that in 2016 it wasn't the popular vote that mattered but the Electoral college. We haven't heard much about that topic in the past 3 yrs.
Scary but Jay Leno used to find this during street interviews. Many laughed, many cringed. Same thing is obviously happening now. Sad!
Good reminder of the Leno segment. It just seems worse when it is happening in a college classroom. But then again, I remember a college freshman approaching me in college to help him with his geography homework. He asked me where Vietnam was. This was 1977.
Ignorance is strength...etc. ✌️
Fantastic piece. And so excited for your addition to the Board of the Chapman. Bravo!
People have gotten out of the mainstream news habit and it’s not replicated well on the social media people actually use. I get it — morning network news shows are like infomercials. They actually have the anchors selling products and the guests are PR placements. The nightly news is just shrieking. As for newspapers, I wish people would read those — even the New York Post would have details on Yevgeny Prigozhin.
The thing is: this IS very serious times because climate change is happening, Gun shootings are so common and I hear next year they are going to CUT. Social Security which many people desperately need. And…there a threat to our democracy if Donald Trump wins again. Yes, we live in precarious times.
Your commentary reminds me of a quote attributed to the author/ entertainer Garrison Keillor .....
“ The purpose of civil government is not to seek revenge against the people we imagine think they are better than us.”
Our elected leaders ( regardless of political party affiliation) are unable to arrive at consensus and seemingly are inclined to find a boogeyman around every corner. Most of today’s politics consist of a pervasive attitude that all controversies must be a contest between “ them” against “us.”
The message that citizens should be sending to our local, statewide and national elected officials is that an attitude adjustment is in order. Where do we start?
The idea of ‘bothsidesism’ is a mask to cover the reason leaders can’t find consensus. The GOP in recent years gained the nickname ‘the Party of No’ for very real reason. It is a strategic decision to deny consensus on major issues in an attempt to claw back progressive gain on numerous issues since the Civil Rights movement.
If we are to find consensus we should start with recognition of that. Here’s a test, was the denial of Merrick Garland an up or down vote for a Supreme Court seat fair and just? Was it simply smart strategy? Or was it denial of rightful process?
Let us not forget that GWB lost the popular vote, only became president because of a SCOTUS a ruling that the justices were embarrassed at, and then he turned around and told the country that he had a mandate to drive conservative policy change. Was that bothsidesism? When GWB asked for authorization to use force saying that just having the authority was enough to intimidate Saddam Hussein, and many Democrats reluctantly voted to give him that authority IN THE SPIRIT OF FINDING CONSENSUS - then Bush lied his way into an illegal war in which his administration authorized war crimes - all while millions of Americans took to the streets in an attempt to prevent us from going to war - was that ‘both sides’?
NO. Denial of consensus falls heavily on the shoulders of the GOP.
And the GOP candidates for president stood on a stage and most of them said they would support their party candidate whoever it is! Even if it is a person who everybody knows in their hearts attempted a coup, and insurrection, sedition against the USA. Talk about breaking your Oath of Office!
So what consensus am I to find with people who will overthrow our government? Am I obligated to reduce my abhorrence of sedition and insurrection? Am I supposed to take it seriously when Proud Boys recite the Pledge of Allegiance on the street in Saratoga Springs?
Let’s stop pretending both sides are equally guilty in not finding consensus.
Great question.
Things ARE getting better. But things don’t get better by accident, and too often we are ‘fixing’ problems the expensive way - when we are already deep in them and nobody can deny their existence. Foresight, planning, and well conceived action long before everyone concedes that what was once a problem on the horizon becomes a crisis of the moment is nice once in a while. Richard Nixon empowered a panel to study atmospheric warming. Jimmy Carter instituted economy standards for autos and tried to encourage green energy. Back when Mao was Chairman in China the USA could have been driving a worldwide clean energy future. We could have enriched ourselves while supplying clean power and technology to the world and massively improving lives of people in poor countries. Imagine if we had developed our economy in a way that enriched itself on 3rd World countries not at their expense, not by encouraging them to plunder their natural resources, not by selling them guns and bullets, but by helping them leapfrog past economies based on Mass Consumption and build clean, resilient communities able to sustain themselves and their traditions. We would very likely not have massive numbers of desperate people crowding our southern border, dying in deserts, drowning in the Mediterranean, using every last resource their families can muster to pay for escape only to die far from family and home, selling their kidneys and even their children to buy food for their families.
Instead people of vision are painted as alarmist nuts. Go ahead, tell me another Al Gore joke.
We tend to think that the way our system works is simply a natural thing, it just exists, but it isn’t. We are a Mass Consumer society because Mass Consumption has been basic US policy since not long after WW2 and it was used as a weapon of the Cold War. I’m not crating conspiracy theories here, I’m relating history. When you go to the store to buy a bigger TV, or a 2nd or 5th TV; when you buy a gas guzzling truck; when you buy or build a bigger house than you need and then you have to fill it with furniture, heat it, cool it, pay the taxes on it…, when you have some irrational desire to buy some stuff that you really do not need - that you know deep in your heart that you do not need - you are under the spell of economic theories and models developed when you were a child or long before you were born. I’m not making this up - see attached links. These ideas were misguided at the time and not sufficiently corrected since first becoming core economic policy.
So, yeah, our economy is very strong, we are (as a whole) rich in stuff. Our economy has been powerful enough to stem many of the problems Mass Consumption has created here and around the world. But there is a tipping point. We hover at it. Perhaps people will think I’m alarmist for saying so. Or, maybe they will read the attached links and do some research on their own. Maybe. Probably not.
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2012/oct/08/us-economist-walt-rostow-development
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walt_Rostow
Congratulations on joining the Chapman board. It is a treasure!
Right on, Ken. As a pastoral theologian for more than sixty years, the politicians and others you describe I have come to refer to as “apocalyptic hopers”—they believe that the worse things get the better they are. Pessimism and negativism get us nowhere. We need to be realistic, to be sure, but misinformation and disinformation need to be recognized and confronted. Where love and justice prevail there is cause for authentic hope. (Justice, for me, is the public face of compassion).
Well said.
Also appreciated the “oh my” piece.
In terms of uninformed youngsters, is it any worse than decades past? I recall a conversation probably 30 years ago when I was in my teens or early 20s, discussing ancestry. I explained that I was Jewish and German (2 different sides of the family) but this young man I was talking to was dumbfounded: “I didn’t know there were any Jews in Germany.” 😳.
One big detail is wrong, Ken. The class I posted about who know so little about current events was not at RPI, but at UAlbany. And they are not STEM majors; they are journalism students. And still, only three out of 60 could answer all five question about major news events of the past week.
Very disturbing that many of today's college students are so uniformed about current events.
Sorry Rosemary I will correct.
Congratulations on joining the Chapman Board. The Chapman is a gem.
I see so many online bits saying voter fraud is real, etc. I question the sources, etc and have noticed the lies that are taking root around me. I also recall that in 2016 it wasn't the popular vote that mattered but the Electoral college. We haven't heard much about that topic in the past 3 yrs.