26 September 2010 -- George Carlin did an effective routine mocking the “stuff” we accrue, the basic point of which was: We have too much – not just external stuff, but internal stuff too (e.g., fat is just energy stored for future use, yet some of us carry enough for a couple of life times). If we are materially rich by historical standards, and well-off by almost any other standard then why is there malaise, anger, and divisiveness amongst us. I see two sources. First, I sense a loss of spirituality among many of us. Without getting into a rant about professional sports, watching rich men play games has become very important to many of us. Why? Is watching MLB, NFL and NBA more important than contemplating and acting on our first and most important principles? The last great civilization to raise entertainment to mass spectacle did not fare well, and I believe historians generally view the rise of the “games” to be a symptom of the decay of the Roman Empire. In my opinion, consternation about decay in our own society is not a productive activity because it misses the point I believe most important anyway: Change is a consequence of individual actions aggregated across the population as a whole. And on this point, I am optimistic for positive change. Although I do not belong to any tea party group, I previously published newspaper opinion pieces that made many of the same points. Thereafter, I was not aware of any change. However, the failure of this Democratic administration and Congress to listen to people’s concerns, and the subsequent actions that they did take created the environment in which the tea party took root. Now, the tea party movement (which is not a Republican party movement) exists as a decentralized, yet connected and vigilant, force in American politics (It is interesting to note that there are other examples of these relatively spontaneous movements emergence, for example during Tiananmen Square actions and more recently the Green movement in Iran; and there examples of excellent use of the internet to organize party politics in this country in Howard Dean’s and Obama’s runs for the presidential nomination). The tea party is coalesced around some constitutional and governmental principles which have such force with a large proportion of the U.S. citizenry that I predict the tea party movement will be with us for a long time. Whether in morphs into a political party is debatable, but I hope not because political parties are at their base open conspiracies to reward some constituencies and not others. We need some focused on the greater good, which in the end means the good of all, not just those on the winning side of an election. Contemplation, yet not blind acceptance, of first principles (e.g., the golden rule, Buddhist, Christian or Islamic principles, etc) is a basis for choosing actions that are more likely to serve the good of all. The second source is a lack of tolerance for those who differ from us, followed by the implementation of laws, taxes, and authorities to discourage the behaviors and views not tolerated. For example, the criminalization of drug use created vast new populations of “criminals”. Our war on drugs has not stopped the consumption, but it has created hundreds of thousands, if not millions of criminals – all of whom become more alienated from the rest of us because their ability to participate fully in society is curtailed. Another example, the “health” lobby keeps raising taxes on smokers – well beyond the point where they are paying for their medical bills caused by smoking – on rich people (via luxury taxes), the rich (via luxury taxes), and drinkers (using taxes rather than prohibition to attempt to eradicate this wayward behavior). Enough I say. Let’s devise a world view of government for the good of all – one that fosters a tax system in which all citizens contribute revenues to the state, and in which the burden of taxes on each citizen is not onerous. Whoa Bill. Get back to the point here. The point is: Contemplation, not blind acceptance, of first principles will engender tolerance. Tolerance will engender more careful consideration of what is fair, and doing the fair thing will increase the good for all. Clearly, putting burdens on our children and theirs is a long way from doing the fair thing, no matter what high-minded rhetoric you wrap it in. It’s stll a bunch of “stuff” (I’d use another word, but I’m sure you already know that other word).
Thought for the day: I’ll pay my bills, you pay yours. If one of us suffers a catastrophe, we’ll sit down and figure it out.
No comments:
Post a Comment