Naming Rights

Have you noticed that people are free to label things, even define things, in their own terms as though they have the ultimate right to do so? And then they spread it far and wide? We see this in letters to the editor, blogs, news columns, pundit rants and in news bites on TV and radio. Eventually they are repeated so often they take on the mantle of authority. But are they correct or authoritative?

I think not. Consider political labels of right, left, and centrist. Who has the objectivity or even perspective to get it right? I could go on here at length, but suffice it to say: Conservatives have been defining the arguments of right and left for years now; in the process they have excised the middle of the road position. Now anything not conservative is automatically defined as liberal. Poop on that I say! There is the Liberal, the Middle and the Conservative. There are countless variations and grades of each of the three. But the three remain. I refuse to authorize one party to define the rest of society’s thinkers.

Continuing the political bent, notice who speaks as economists? Concludes what has happened, or is happening and will happen all because of some economic ‘law?’ Bosh and nonsense! Even traders on Wall Street pass themselves off as economists. In reality they are only mechanics, doers of transactions, and fixers of transactions.  They are not the arbiters of what is cause-effect-result of the market. They only note trends, and then not solely on the facts, but rather feelings. They speak of nuance, not of substance.

The economic news talk show hosts (consider CNBC) pass themselves off as economists and true seers of the economy. Actually, they only speak of their own interests and what they perceive as supporting their interests. All else, even the unknown, is cast as enemy to their exalted position. How do we restore balance to this tipsy scene? 

More political nonsense: current global economic mess. If it is bad news it sticks to whom? The person or group who did the most to cause it? Or the person or group people think should do something about it? 

Clearly the economists are finally speaking up and pointing to conclusions emanating from analysis of pre-recessionary 2007 events. Consider the accumulative impact of:

• Overheated markets (real estate, banking, investment, etc.)
• Unearned tax cuts of the upper income and wealthy
• Runaway executive salaries and bonuses
• Unraveling of regulatory oversight on banking, investment, insurance and real estate industries
• Waging two wars simultaneously
• Campaign finance reform changed to meaningless fluff
• Overheated lobbying of congress for sweetheart legislation in return for campaign donations

So the question remains: who do we look to for cause-effect-result? How do we measure culpability as to cause, and what does that get us? Probably nothing. Those folks are generally not in a position to fix the problem at this late date, nor are they willing to accept the blame for it. So naturally the problem falls to…….those that didn’t cause it in the first place!! Ta da! Don’t you love modern politics?

Look, this process is helpful at the very least in learning how current problems came to be. If we are good on that part, then we have a better chance to enact corrective action, provided we have the cooperation of the assembled authorities. Oops. I forgot that group inevitably includes some of the people who don’t want to accept personal blame for the problem, so they might not be very cooperative.

And of course, they may wish to manipulate circumstances to frustrate current political enemies so they are powerless alone to fix the nation’s problems.  This makes the ‘in power’ people look ineffective. Problem is, however, it only makes our problems worse and more difficult to repair, if not downright intractable. If this is true we may be doomed.

Now that is a heady thought! Doomed.

Are we really? What is the probability that political gamers are playing with our national future as though it is a huge game of “Chicken?” Are they really so focused on political power that they are willing to lose our very existence in a perilous game of brinksmanship? Really?

Maybe so. If that is true, however, what do the losers feel about that? That would be you and I and our families and friends and neighbors. Are we willing to accept this state of affairs? Are we willing to sit back and let it happen? Or are we ready to call a liar a liar and take responsibility for our democracy?

The Wall Street Occupiers or protesters,…are they on to something we should be paying attention to and listening to? Do we care?

October 9, 2011