“The individual citizen can with horror convince himself in this war of what would occasionally cross his mind in peacetime- that the state has forbidden to the individual the practice of wrong-doing, not because it desires to abolish it, but because it wants to monopolize it . . .”
- written by Sigmund Freud (Thoughts for the Times on War and Death, 1915)
Yes, that was written by the world’s most historically famous psychiatrist during World War I, but it stands up pretty well today. Given the types and quantities of crimes being committed that have nothing to do with the state/government, I can’t quite agree with the quotation in its entirety, but if the sentiment is restricted to crimes conducted under the auspices of campaigns, government generally, and overseen by politicians, whether unwittingly or deliberately, well then, our man Freud has a point.
Bad apples: The old cliche- the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree is quite true; if the tree is elected elected officials, then the apples are the political pundits and talk show hosts, the worm-ridden fruit resting comfortably in the shade of the tree it once hung from, inhabited by all kinds of insects, seen and unseen, rotting in the hole, in the groove, its impact with the ground has made. Both types of people, politicians and pundits should share the blame for being the biggest part of the middle class problem I’ve spent a year researching and months unleashing. The media/talk show hosts/political pundits continue to report on poll numbers which influence sheep-like voters which leaves the less popular, but not the less qualified, candidates out of the loop. I would think that voting for someone who would represent us as citizens on whatever level of government imaginable wouldn’t be mindful of how one’s prom king and queen were elected when I was in high school.
Wag the dog: Today’s evil political equivalents come in the forms of the media, (one example would be Bill O’Reilly, as an emissary, an accomplice, a leech of evil along the lines of Beelzebub) and Hillary Clinton (one example of a politician- more along the lines of Satan himself). One needn’t have read "Paradise Lost" to follow me here. Neither the politicians nor most members of the media are all that interested in allowing the public to become fully acquainted with the metaphorical equivalent of the apple granted to Eve in the Garden of Eden because the government’s monopolizing manner of controlling the practice of wrong-doing (to cite Freud above) would be subject to the will of the public, that is, if the public could ever effectively organize. Political pundits and talk show hosts are the fleas and the politicians are the dog; and the fleas only very infrequently bite the breed of dog that supports their livelihood in this world, for it is wrong for a republican flea like Bill O’Reilly to bite one of his hosts, Mike Huckabee. O’Reilly, Jason Lewis, Bob Davis, etc. are more suited to bite democratic dogs like Hillary Clinton or John Edwards. When I’ve heard conservative talk show hosts discuss the field of republican candidates for president with anxiety, I’ve learned that the pundits are dissatisfied with the current crop of republicans because the pundits find the republican candidates might not be guaranteed to kick a democratic nominee’s behind in a general election. Huh, if you aren’t that enamored with your own candidates, why don’t you vote for an Independent. Fleas, dogs, trees, apples- the blessed metaphors. Sorry, but so many metaphors strike me as being ripe (ahem, we are talking about apples here) for the dysfunctional topic at hand.
Media bias: The liberals have a majority when it comes to maintaining a passive-aggressive stranglehold on the media of television and newspaper. So the conservatives, insecure by this slight, use the radio to rail on the liberals in a desperate attempt to get back at them, like politics is some little spat between toddlers who haven’t yet made enough noise for their parents to take notice. Oh, they’re related alright- the democrats and the republicans. Many psychologists, including Freud, would tell you that the people that we are most likely to find fault with are the ones who are most like ourselves, and happens without our even knowing it. The democrats and republicans hate each other and it is the voters that lose out because often this escalates into personality conflicts rather than issue debate. And the voter is at a loss as to how to hold candidates accountable for not talking about the things that matter.
I otter: I again recently wrote in to Bob Davis, just another in a long line of conservative radio talk show hosts, who is based in Minnesota. His topic that day concerned the lack of issues being discussed by the then over-populated field of political candidates. He was frustrated that all they were talking about were personal differences, sex, race, religion, weight, likability, on what side of their scalp their rival parts his hair, etc. He then asked for people to call in, requesting their opinions on what are some of the issues they’d like the candidates to discuss. I wrote in, because I can’t call in at work and don’t listen at home- I have to focus on successfully accomplishing one of my myriad of New Year’s resolutions- one of which is to try to eat non-rotten apples left handed. Anyway, I wrote in that the biggest issue, the Rosetta Stone of issues, the root of the problem, if you will, was campaign finance. These candidates are raking in millions from individuals and corporations that the candidate will be beholden to when or if they get elected. Anyone who doesn’t think this is a major problem is more naïve than a dim-witted, homeless crab with a hearing problem who in mid June accepts the dinner invitation of an otter who swears he has given up shellfish for lint. See, the hard of hearing crab, thought that the otter said Lent. Lent is a religious period extending 40 days from Ash Wednesday to Holy Thursday, which often places the demand on adherents of catholicism to give something up which one enjoys. But the dim-witted crab became confused; it didn’t occur to her that Lent occurs in March and April and never in June. And an otter giving up the delicacy of fresh shellfish in favor of lint, well, that is just pure insanity. So, the crab was confused on many fronts.
Campaign finance: Anyway, Davis downplayed it and asked if I had ever gotten involved, ever campaigned for a candidate, volunteered to be an election judge, participated in a caucus, contributed to a campaign. Actually, for him, these are fairly substantial questions which he meant rhetorically. I responded that contributing in such ways, especially monetarily, was a waste of time, and his other suggestions were small potatoes compared to the larger issues of most candidates being on the hook for returning the favor of receiving millions of dollars to aid in their campaign effort. Caucus? Did he wonder if I had ever attended a caucus? Hilarious, and next he’ll tell me that an NFL team can thrive while running the wishbone offense. The playing field, in every walk of life, changes in time. The measures he listed are for a time that has long since passed. The politicians, corporations, etc. are playing hide and seek with the money earned by the middle class. So far as I remember, the game of hide and seek is best played when those who are hiding keep quiet about their location. Unfortunately for us, politicians, corporations, lobbyists, special interest groups, etc. are better at this game than the taxpayers. Where and how are they hiding it and how much are they hiding? See parts 9-11. Politicians are spending billions of dollars on a war the public is increasingly against and the best idea you have is to tell a well-informed INDEPENDENT voter to caucus? This is the kind of guy that would cite and fine a homeowner for code violations while his house was burning to the ground, a fire proven not to have been caused by the violations in question. The house in that example is symbolic of the country- just making sure you're following me. Now, Cletis and Eunice might have met in Mabel's barn to caucus in the 1920s, but that pig just isn't going to fly these days.
My response to Bob’s solutions: I’m quoting myself here, awfully pretentious- “How beholden would a republican candidate be to a guy who gave $100, helping to finance the republican's campaign, and asking the republican to vote FOR the smoking ban, if the tobacco company that gave his political party $10.3 million requested that he vote AGAINST the smoking ban?” I've found that Bob often doesn't have answers to other people's questions. I’m sure Bob feels that he has monopolized knowledge, but I learned that the largest contributor to the republican party prior to the 2000 presidential election was the tobacco corporation Phillip Morris ($10.3 million). Among the other top 25 is R. J. Reynolds, another major tobacco company. (Courtesy of Charles Lewis' book: "The Buying of the President 2004: Who's Really Bankrolling Bush and His Democratic Challengers--and What They Expect in Return"). Is it any wonder why republicans in congress would largely vote against a smoking ban in what are deemed public areas such as restaurants. Now, republicans would tell you that they voted against the smoking ban because it is a check on our personal liberties, because they detest regulations.
There is some truth to that. But for the same reason, isn’t it a personal liberty violation to continue to allow smoking in public places when at least 75% of the people don’t smoke? Head to: http://www.cancer.org/docroot/PED/content/PED_10_2X_Secondhand_Smoke-Clean_Indoor_Air.asp (revised 10/25/2007) where you’ll find that second-hand smoke inhalation was found to be the cause of 38,400 deaths from heart disease and lung cancer alone. Incidentally, I wrote in to Jason Lewis, another Minnesota based conservative radio talk show host this summer when the smoking ban topic was in high gear (see the end of part 10). I informed him that while I was writing to him to decry his attempt to compare the right to smoke in public places to the right to eat oneself to death, my wife was attempting to prevent my son from smacking my daughter across the top of the head with a plastic toy. She advised my son that he couldn’t hit other people, and that he could, but shouldn’t, hit himself either. I hoped that Mr. Lewis was able to take my meaning. It must only be a violation of personal liberty if a conservative says so.
The politics of perfect: See, conservatives think that this country is perfect when they are in power and call all the shots. Democrats think this country is in a terrible state of affairs no matter who is in power and will continue to think so until white men are the minority, all reparations have been made to any current minority, and they hand over the country to Mexicans, Middle-Easterners, Indians, Hmongs, etc. Teddy Roosevelt, a republican, said: “ ‘I don’t think that any harm comes from the concentration of power in one man’s hands.’ ” (I’m quoting from George Will’s November 25, 2007 article- http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/11/the_failings_of_heroic_conserv.html). I’m pretty sure T.R. said this well after he led the Rough Rider’s charge up Kettle Hill during the Spanish-American War, like when he was president- see, because that is when he had the most power. Thing is, a lot of republicans think that this country would be perfect if no one ever questioned a thing they do, because they would have the citizens believe that ‘everything is for the best in this the best of all possible worlds’- to paraphrase a sarcastic famous line used by Voltaire in his novel "Candide." I agree with Will’s assessment of conservatives and thought as he does prior to having read his article because of my electronic mail exchanges with conservative talk show host Mr. Davis. Roosevelt’s cousin, Franklin Delano, a democrat, had more power as president than Teddy ever did, and I know the republican’s don’t look upon the New Deal initiatives F.D.R. shoved through congress all that favorably in retrospect.
On many levels, this country may be without peer in the world, but it is not without a ton of rotten apples. Seemingly, any disgust felt and somewhat allowed to be expressed by citizens who feel compelled to call into any conservative’s show is met by the host with pontification, and filibustering which placates the mostly ill-equipped callers into submission or silence. Bob Davis, and hundreds of conservatives and liberals like him are part of the problem. They won’t justify any of the disgust of the millions of people like me who are rightfully at odds with American politics and government or concede any reasonable, provable ways in which conscientious voters express themselves. A colleague listens to Davis as well and corrected me once. After I sent an instant message to my friend stating that one caller had brought a knife to a gun fight, he responded- no, he brought a spork. Bob Davis is apparently never wrong, as I’ve discovered. Davis is much like the tree from which he . . . stems- George W. Bush, republican president, who upon direct questioning at a number of news conferences, will never come up with one instance where he made a mistake in judgment as president. Hmm- in seven years in office?
Echo Narcissism: I believe I’ve come up with an original term for radio talk show hosts, equating them to the combination of two Greek mythical figures. Both of the stories have a few variations, one of which concerns Echo falling in love with Narcissus. The most popular version of the Echo story is that Hera punished the nymph Echo by having her repeat only the last syllable of the last person to utter a word. After the caller is hung up on, the host can then mockingly berate the caller, repeating (Echo) the argument if only to chastise the sentiment. I have found that the host repeats their view again and again, apparently thinking they can somehow equate that repetition to a resolution of the issue in their favor. Since talk show hosts are paid for talking, and in many cases, talking over the listener gracious enough to provide some fodder to their show, I think this an appropriate connection, but not nearly as appropriate as the second component of this malady whose almost exclusive membership is comprised of talk show hosts. Narcissus was a hero who was quite enamored with his own beauty. In most versions of the story, Narcissus becomes entranced with his reflection in a pool of water. He is transfixed and despite his sorrow, for reasons I won’t get into here, but perhaps might have extended to him becoming overly enamored with the political leader of his choice, he essentially falls in love with himself. So, political pundits, experts, radio talk show hosts, whose opinions aren’t to be questioned, even those who would call themselves democrats, in my opinion should be diagnosed by a psychiatrist from this point forward as suffering from Echo Narcissism. Their opinion is beyond reproof; they will talk over you; they will mockingly repeat what it is a contrarian might have to say in dispute of the host’s monopolizing views, and they love themselves for their ability to do so. They have the right and the platform, for they are paid to do so and their employers expect it of them.
List of Echo Narcissists/parasitic blow-hards: Most any radio or television talk show personality could be listed, and since I wouldn’t be able to come up with a comprehensive list- I’ll leave that to the imagination of any reader still following this topic. Most of the Echo Narcissists I had a mind to refer to are much more conservative than liberal, which further echoes my point about the media bias in regards to the type of media format I mention above. What is especially interesting is that plenty of those I have in mind are MN radio personalities; Minnesota is historically one of the wildest cards in the deck of politics when it comes to voting for elected officials, because we will vote for anything- republicans, democrats, even former wrestlers, and probably narcoleptic cheetahs with a drastic case of halitosis derived from their inability to work the floss that would clear the gazelle cartilage from their incisors. Largely though, MN is considered a liberal state, the only state to vote for Mondale in the 1984 presidential election- (along with the District of Columbia- Mondale too brought a spork to a gunfight, gathering only 13 total electoral votes). Another friend of mine wondered at my idea of bringing an independent voice to the radio, stating that it wouldn’t work. I don’t bring sporks to gunfights. You would need advertisers and money and once companies, who are not buying politicians, find that an independent could gain an audience, we would be able to shout down the self-important jackasses who think we breath to hear their opinion.
How about those apples: Truth be told, I have a mature apple tree in my back yard and can’t stand the thing. The apples aren’t good enough to eat. In the autumn, bees inhabit them; the apples fall to the ground and rot, with worms, flies, and ants using them as apartment complexes so far as I can tell. I put gloves on to pick them up before mowing because they are so infiltrated with nature’s bottom-feeders- bees are the major tenants. My curious, near three-year-old will soon find them suitable play things and finding out if he or his younger sister will have a severe allergic reaction to a bee sting isn’t something I’m looking forward to. So, this coming spring, I will be treating my father’s chainsaw to an apple-tizer, a small taste of food, featuring apples, that in this case won't precede a feast. I’ve already used an apple tree as a fit analogy for the current state of politics. It will bring me great pleasure to remove such an insidious thing from the confines of this earth. If only divesting ourselves from most democrats and republicans were that easy.
The value of the vote: We, as a nation of voters, have been operating under the assumption that politicians are elected to represent us. I know this because we keep electing them. Politicians are clearly more beholden to the corporations that give them millions of dollars to fund campaigns than they are to a nation in which only half of the people vote. Now, this corruption may have come up gradually, unwittingly, or knowingly, with some of the politicians being more naturally inclined toward incompetence than others who are much more complicit, more deliberately evil, self-seeking and Satan-like, but rest assured, it is entirely possible that many of the politicians we’ve been electing aren’t so much thinking of those whom they are supposed to dutifully represent. So, despite a republican’s or a democrat’s best hopes, maybe the collective citizenry of the country, especially the millions of middle class voters, might begin to think and act as if their best interests aren’t being attended to. For, if we have been assuming the best without recent demonstrated proof that they aren’t acting in our best interests and the citizens are as disgruntled and frustrated as we appear to be without anything changing, shouldn’t we, for the sake of change, simply begin to assume the worst. Can't we begin to assume that politicians are entirely too beholden to the corporations and individuals who provide them with the larger campaign contributions? We could then champion a more conscientious set of political representatives, a more sincere-looking set of turkeys (to recall the contents of the political cartoon from part 15) and place them into office by the use of our vote? Oh, voting, that would be something people can do to alter the political landscape- yeah, that would be participating in the political process, and perhaps the only thing that can be done to turn the tide.
Apple of my eye: In short, we may not be able to finally, definitively and to all people prove that the current or upcoming group of politicians are morally bankrupt and are selling our future so that 1-10% of the country can benefit financially. But maybe we should assume that politicians, with few exceptions, have been plausibly denying their moral bankruptcy since the legitimized politically functional beginning of this country back in 1789. Isn’t that worth the passion of the protest vote, and a true appeal by the voters to change what simply voting the lesser of two evils into office will never be able to accomplish? A protest vote can powerful, if millions of people decide to cast it.
Next time: I will delve into some of the secondary source material I have read/skimmed in support of my theories- attorneys would probably call this corroborating evidence. Some of it was written by fleas, some of it was written by dogs, and some of it was written by a conscientious third group that seems to despise or be indifferent to the existence of both.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment