cynicism
A. An attitude of scornful or jaded negativity, especially a general distrust of the integrity or professed motives of others: the public cynicism aroused by governmental scandals.
B. A scornfully or jadedly negative comment or act: "She arrived at a philosophy of her own, all made up of her private notations and cynicisms" (Henry James).
C. Cynicism The beliefs of the ancient Cynics.
I am pretty often accused of being a cynic; particularly when the issue at hand is religion, American Politics, or American Capitalism. When I am it is pretty clear that, usually, the people doing the accusing are thinking of "A" and / or "B". And what can I say? Though I wouldn't think of myself as a cynic in all things and at all times, when it comes to those three arenas the label definitely fits. But I never really think of myself as a cynical person.
But "C" got me curious. I was vaguely aware that cynicism had it roots in Greek Philosophy going back to Socrates, but that was pretty much it. Looking it up lead to this description;
... For the Cynics, the purpose of life was to live in virtue, in agreement with nature. As reasoning creatures, people could gain happiness by rigorous training and by living in a way which was natural for humans, rejecting all conventional desires for wealth, power, sex, and fame. Instead, they were to lead a simple life free from all possessions.
Sadly, is seems the ancient Greek Cynics went a bit off the rails. Diogenes of Sinope is reported to have lived in a barrel and taught that all the trappings of human civilization be rejected. Living like an animal and off the money gathered by begging just doesn't strike me as a path to wisdom, joy or understanding, at least not for most of us. It also strikes me a more than a little hypocritical. (I am unimpressed with the Buddha for the same basic reason.)
Still, when placed against the background of our civilization, one that has surly gone off the rails itself, it seems those old cynics might have found a kernel of wisdom that we would be well served to plant and tend. Living in virtue ... set that against a society awash in guns, that worships violence and loves war. Living in harmony with nature ... does anything more need to be said? Who would argue that unbridled lust for wealth, power, sex, and fame have been good for our society and are leading to a future of justice, peace and joy?
Maybe, with an eye toward a little moderation, it is time for the ancient cynicism of the Greeks to make a comeback. In any case, it would appear I am more of a cynic than I first thought.
Monday, June 24, 2013
Friday, June 7, 2013
Inventions
"America as it now exists is untenable. Whatever is rising up to replace it is being invented right in front us."
I put that statement up on a public board during a discussion about the nascent labor movement at Wall Mart. It might be one of those that means more than it appears, and reflects more optimism that I usually express. I think it might even be righter than we yet realize.
America as it now exists really is untenable. At the very foundation of our economic polities are three economic myths, constant exponential growth, trickle down economics, and austerity budgets, that are a triad of failure. Yet the government clings to them because they still (temporarily anyway) allow the unbelievably rich get just that little bit richer. These myths have become so entrenched in American politics that changing any of them would involve fundamental shifts in the public view of government and a radical re-alignment of the power structures in Washington. Do away with all of those three and you do away with America as we have known it since the days of Reagan.
Some think we could go back to the days before Reagan. Not a revolution but a return to policies that worked. I don't think this is an option. There was no real Internet before Reagan. Though having unions turned out to be a far better thing then not having unions, it isn't like unions don't have their own massive problems with corruption, oppression and a power elite. Many Americans, even union Americans, shrugged when Reagan cut the balls off the air traffic controllers. The unions burned up their share of the public trust and have yet to regain it. The days of Reagan were the days of the cold war. Religious terrorism was a regional problem, not a threat to society. Mostly though, Reagan's world was a world where corporations took control of the propaganda machine and colored themselves as the true champions of human progress. Only now is the spell just starting to ware off. All in, the world is a much different place than it was on January 20, 1981.
Going back will not make room for a better future. One thing that must happen to go forward is that working people will have to band together to get their share of say in the future. Trade based unions were the tool of choice once upon a time, but have too narrow a vision to be of use now. Trade based and focused only on the wages and benefits of select groups of people spread out around a nation is not a broad enough view. All issues of quality of life need addressed, and those issues very often have a local bias. Environmental issues for desert workers are different than for those working coasts or flood plains, even if they labor is the same industry. The desert worker needs fresh water at her house as well as at her factory. The flood plain dweller needs his house protected from rising waters even as the flood gates are closed to keep his factory dry. Solving those problems with have an impact on wages and benefits unique to each location. At the same time all labor needs to be included in the power sharing. Plumber and maid, factory worker and health care provider, all have more in common with each other than they do with Wall Street financiers or corporate management. But just as Wall Street and Corporate America cooperate in keeping power, all labor needs to cooperate to get their fair share of that power. A "Reunión Política de Trabajadores" would be a start, but Americans have been brain washed to equate anything "Labor" with "communist" and therefore "bad".
So current policies have and are failing. The policies of the past were often abandoned for very good reasons. There is nothing left but to face the future knowing a whole new economics, new systems of government, are new ways of organizing and sharing power, must be invented. We face definable problems but we have no answers. Income distribution is outright immoral. Environmental choices are proving disastrous and perhaps fatal. International politics of confrontation and war put our entire civilization at risk.
We need utterly new ways of being a civilized people on this little planet. There doesn't appear to be much hope of such on the horizon. But I take solice in the fact our horizon, particularly in the propaganda soaked West, is obscured by the very forces desperate to ride the fall to the very end. It will be hard to spot the new things until they have grown strong enough to sweep away the old. Then it will appear that they "came out of nowhere." But that will not be the case.
Somewhere they are being invented even as we look.
I put that statement up on a public board during a discussion about the nascent labor movement at Wall Mart. It might be one of those that means more than it appears, and reflects more optimism that I usually express. I think it might even be righter than we yet realize.
America as it now exists really is untenable. At the very foundation of our economic polities are three economic myths, constant exponential growth, trickle down economics, and austerity budgets, that are a triad of failure. Yet the government clings to them because they still (temporarily anyway) allow the unbelievably rich get just that little bit richer. These myths have become so entrenched in American politics that changing any of them would involve fundamental shifts in the public view of government and a radical re-alignment of the power structures in Washington. Do away with all of those three and you do away with America as we have known it since the days of Reagan.
Some think we could go back to the days before Reagan. Not a revolution but a return to policies that worked. I don't think this is an option. There was no real Internet before Reagan. Though having unions turned out to be a far better thing then not having unions, it isn't like unions don't have their own massive problems with corruption, oppression and a power elite. Many Americans, even union Americans, shrugged when Reagan cut the balls off the air traffic controllers. The unions burned up their share of the public trust and have yet to regain it. The days of Reagan were the days of the cold war. Religious terrorism was a regional problem, not a threat to society. Mostly though, Reagan's world was a world where corporations took control of the propaganda machine and colored themselves as the true champions of human progress. Only now is the spell just starting to ware off. All in, the world is a much different place than it was on January 20, 1981.
Going back will not make room for a better future. One thing that must happen to go forward is that working people will have to band together to get their share of say in the future. Trade based unions were the tool of choice once upon a time, but have too narrow a vision to be of use now. Trade based and focused only on the wages and benefits of select groups of people spread out around a nation is not a broad enough view. All issues of quality of life need addressed, and those issues very often have a local bias. Environmental issues for desert workers are different than for those working coasts or flood plains, even if they labor is the same industry. The desert worker needs fresh water at her house as well as at her factory. The flood plain dweller needs his house protected from rising waters even as the flood gates are closed to keep his factory dry. Solving those problems with have an impact on wages and benefits unique to each location. At the same time all labor needs to be included in the power sharing. Plumber and maid, factory worker and health care provider, all have more in common with each other than they do with Wall Street financiers or corporate management. But just as Wall Street and Corporate America cooperate in keeping power, all labor needs to cooperate to get their fair share of that power. A "Reunión Política de Trabajadores" would be a start, but Americans have been brain washed to equate anything "Labor" with "communist" and therefore "bad".
So current policies have and are failing. The policies of the past were often abandoned for very good reasons. There is nothing left but to face the future knowing a whole new economics, new systems of government, are new ways of organizing and sharing power, must be invented. We face definable problems but we have no answers. Income distribution is outright immoral. Environmental choices are proving disastrous and perhaps fatal. International politics of confrontation and war put our entire civilization at risk.
We need utterly new ways of being a civilized people on this little planet. There doesn't appear to be much hope of such on the horizon. But I take solice in the fact our horizon, particularly in the propaganda soaked West, is obscured by the very forces desperate to ride the fall to the very end. It will be hard to spot the new things until they have grown strong enough to sweep away the old. Then it will appear that they "came out of nowhere." But that will not be the case.
Somewhere they are being invented even as we look.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)