Home » Posts tagged 'Values' (Page 30)
Tag Archives: Values
The next new thing all over again
Why didn’t I think of that?
Can you remember the world before Post-It notes? Have you ever paused to appreciate the brilliant simplicity of the Phillips-head screw and screwdriver?
How many times have you cursed yourself for sloshing tea onto the table or dropping your keys between the car seat and console? But you never thought of the Tea-Pot Frame of the Drop-Stop Car Seat Gap Filler, did you?
Don’t feel too bad; you have plenty of company. That’s why we might all benefit from reading Adam Grant’s new book, The Originals: How Non-Conformists Move the World.
But here’s the problem: For years, Dr. Pepper challenged the cola establishment with it’s tag-line, Be Original. Promoters knew that we all like to think of ourselves as one-of-a-kind, to imagine that we are masters of our own destiny, a breed apart from the herd. The sad truth is, however, that we only want to imagine it; in reality, nothing scares us more than the fear that we don’t belong.
Even the Dr. Pepper ads reflected our ambivalence toward non-conformity: a whole room full of people line-dancing, in perfect sync with one another, singing “Be original.”
Anti-conformity is easy. Just say no to the party line, and you can always find a cadre of nay-sayers willing to accept you into the ranks of their new conformity. Just look at some of the most unlikely front-runners in our political primary race.
True non-conformity is much more difficult. It requires thought, courage, integrity, perseverance, conviction, and the willingness to be able to join when it’s right to join and stand alone when popular opinion will crucify you for breaking ranks.
It’s just too hard for most of us most of the time. But then, nothing good comes easy, does it?
The Midpoint of the World
As we finally enter the voting season with the Iowa caucuses, I’m drawn back to these thoughts from 2013 on who we are and where we are headed. If hindsight is 20/20, why do we keep making the same mistakes over and over again?
What would you ask of a time traveler from a hundred years ago? And if you traveled a hundred years into the future, what would you want to tell the people you found there? Perhaps it would sound something like this:
What did you do to handle the overpopulations we predicted? How did you protect the seashores? What did you do to keep the ozone layer intact, the energy supplies, the trees? Have you eliminated ignorance, brutality, greed?
There might be no better way to discover unexamined truths about ourselves then by composing a letter to our grandchildren’s grandchildren. This was certainly on the mind of award-winning essayist Roger Rosenblatt a quarter century ago when he penned his deeplythoughtful Letter to 2086:
This letter will be propped up in a capsule at the Statue of Liberty, to be opened on the statue’s bicentennial. Go ahead. Undo the lock. I see your sharp, bright faces as you hoist us into your life, superior as cats to your primitive elders. Quaint, are we not? Beware of superior feelings. The message is in this bottle.
As a student of Jewish philosophy, I don’t believe in coincidences. So when my neighbor — out of the blue — handed me a long forgotten back issue of Time Magazine, the cover article by Mr. Rosenblatt resonated with the faint echo of providence. And although the intended audience still reside three generations in the future, this letter offers a tantalizing window into the past, as well as an illuminating perspective on how much has changed and how much has remained the same.
Click here to read the whole essay.
The Failure of Freedom
For those who care enough to learn the lessons of history, the echoes of the ancient past can be heard clearly amidst the discord of the chaotic present. If we want to understand the crisis of political leadership that plagues our country and our world, we have only to look back to earliest records of national governance, nearly 3000 years ago.
It was the 9th Century Before the Common Era. 391 years had passed since the Children of Israel first entered their land. For nearly four centuries, Jewish society had been plagued by divisiveness, political instability, and spiritual ambivalence. But at last, after the prophet Samuel spent his entire career teaching the Jews to more deeply respect the law and inspiring them to more profoundly appreciate their national mission, the people united in response to his invocations and dispatched emissaries to ask:
“Appoint a king to rule over us like all the other nations” (1 Samuel 8:5).
Seemingly, the Jews had finally come to their collective senses, recognizing that all their political and social strife stemmed from a pervasive national attitude in which “every man did what seemed right in his own eyes” (Judges 21:25). Without a strong executive office to pilot the ship of state, without a single voice of authority to bind many into one, the tribes of Israel remained a disconnected confederation of individuals who joined forces only when necessary and turned against one another whenever self-interest clashed with national purpose and identity.
240 years ago, another attempt was made to create a new nation, conceived in liberty, and built upon guiding principles of equality and justice.
Today, that same nation, blessed with more power, prosperity, freedom, and opportunity than any in the history of the modern world, confronts a political system crippled by bloat, inefficiency, and corruption. At a moment in time when we desperately need inspired leadership, we face a contest between a socialist and a sociopath in one party, a narcissist and a curmudgeon in the other. And while the frontrunners serenade us with siren-songs of high-sounding dreams and visions — all deeply divorced from reality — the few aspirants who attempt to set forth concrete policy proposals and plans of action wallow in low single digits.
Why is the electorate so eager to embrace the illusion of leadership and so unwilling to recognize the real hope of positive change?
Oscar Equality
Click here to listen to my interview with Christal Frost of WCTM Michigan on the Oscars and racism.
You can read last week’s article “Black Actors Matter” here.
Join Bernie to look for Amerika
Just when you thought this election cycle couldn’t get any wackier, the Sanders campaign has launched a new ad blending sixties-style images of protest marchers and flower children with Simon and Garfunkel’s pop-classic “America.” The unctuous 60-second commercial is brilliantly crafted to stir the heartstrings of starry-eyed liberals everywhere.
But here’s the irony: “America” is a ballad lamenting the failure of romanticism to flourish in a society bereft of direction and meaning, and about the disillusionment of a generation that had abandoned traditional values for a utopian fantasy only to find itself left with nothing:
“Kathy, I’m lost”, I said, though I knew she was sleeping.
“I’m empty and aching and I don’t know why.”
Counting the cars on the New Jersey Turnpike,
They’ve all come to look for America,
All come to look for America.
Even Art Garfunkel missed the contradiction of using his own song to endorse a socialist agenda. One might as reasonably use “Mrs. Robinson” in an ad for marriage counseling.
Then again, there really could be no better theme song for the campaign of Bernie Sanders, a holdover from the hippie era passionately espousing grand ideas that could never work.
And, on the Republican side, Donald Trump, the alter-ego of Bernie Sanders, promises us a new America — trust me! — while truly viable candidates repeat the mistakes of 2012, forming a circular firing squad (to quote Mara Liasson) and all but ensuring that the general election will offer us a choice between one brand of demagoguery or another.
Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio?
The Obama Legacy: A World Beyond Cynicism
It really makes you want to scream and cry bang your head against the wall, hoping against hope that you’ll wake from a dystopian nightmare.
The toxic combination of delusion and narcissism that characterizes President Obama and his administration churns through our society like venom as the president trumpets one imagined victory after another and vilifies every critic, all while overseeing the catastrophic disintegration of moral standards, common values, and national security.
By what kind of perverse calculation does the leader of the free world negotiate a hostage release — which should have been part of any treaty from the outset — for the sole purpose of masking the corrosive consequences of that very treaty at the moment of its implementation? Such contrived deception mixed with political incompetence literally staggers the imagination.
The only thing worse is the chilling reality that the president actually believes that he is making the country and the world safer and better. Like Jimmy Carter, Mr. Obama will live out his life believing that he was one of the country’s greatest presidents, and he will remain utterly baffled why no one recognizes his greatness.
Read Charles Krauthammer’s dispiriting post-mortem here.
Black Actors Matter
Well, yes, of course they do. Just like black lives.
But does that mean the white actors don’t? Just like, as it often seems, white lives don’t? And what about (alphabetically) Asian, Hispanic, Jewish, and Native American actors? Do their careers matter? Do their lives matter?
Don’t ask Kathleen McCartney, the president of Smith College who was coerced into apologizing for having the audacity to send off an email with the provocative subject line “All Lives Matter.”
Apparently, some lives matter more than others.
And now, so do some actors.
It’s more that a little astonishing that, in an article dog-piling on the Motion Picture Academy for its racism, the Daily Beast could still manage to rattle off a list of 18 black Oscar winners and nominees.
(Interestingly, the Beast doesn’t seem to think Halle Berry counts, since she’s half-white. Kind of like our half-white president.)
It is true, roars the Beast, that Jamie Foxx, Morgan Freeman, Forest Whitaker, Queen Latifah, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Sophie Okonedo, Eddie Murphy, Octavia Spencer, Djimon Hounsou, Taraji P. Henson, Don Cheadle, Viola Davis, Terrence Howard, Jennifer Hudson, Will Smith, Gabourey Sidibe, Quvenzhané Wallis, and the late Ruby Dee have all received Oscars or Oscar nods since 2001.
Be that as it may, “the last two years have felt like an alarming regression.”
Really? Isn’t two years is an awfully short time span to constitute a trend of any kind, much less one that could be considered even remotely “alarming”? But no: the politics of race and victimization are unbounded by time.
Because, ultimately, it does all come down to politics.
Back in 1971, after delivering one of the greatest screen performances in history, George C. Scott became the first actor ever to refuse an Oscar. The BBC quoted Mr. Scott as having said that the politics surrounding the awards was “demeaning” and describing the Oscar ceremony as “a two-hour meat parade.”
Some things never change.
As the most liberal of all liberal institutions in liberal America, Hollywood continues to produce propaganda pieces despite the inevitability of their box office failures. Films like Brokeback Mountain and Lions for Lambs may have been well-received for advancing certain political and social agendas, but neither attracted much of an audience.
Sidney Poitier where are you, now that we need you?
Indeed, there’s no limit to Tinseltown’s political correctness; and now there’s no arguing against cinematic affirmative action. I suppose it won’t be long before every actor has to get a statuette, just like every kid in Little League has to get a trophy.
And what will be after that? My bet is that it’s only a matter of time before short people file suit claiming discrimination by the NBA.
In the meanwhile, it’s worth revisiting these thoughts on the movie industry from 2009.
A Week of Ironies — Iranian Hostages, Nikki Haley, and $1.5 Billion
In his State of the Union speech, President Obama patted himself on the back for making peace with Iran while, at that very moment, Iran held 10 American sailors in violation of international law and the Geneva Convention. The next day, Secretary John Kerry thanked the Iranians for not keeping the servicemen as hostages.
In the same speech, the president also lamented his failure to create an atmosphere of bipartisanship and cooperation, while passing up no opportunity to snipe at everyone who disagrees with him.
After South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley responded to the president’s address, the angriest voices loudly condemned her for condemning the angriest voices.
Hillary Clinton, who can boast the lowest national rating on trustworthiness since Richard Nixon, dismissed a new FBI investigation into her mishandling of classified information by declaring “that’s just not the way I treated classified information.” Transparency, at last.
However, none of this made much of an impression on an American public entranced by the dream of winning a 1.5 billion dollar lottery, even though about half of multimillion-dollar lottery winners eventually admit that sudden wealth proved more of a curse than a blessing.
Now that three winners are going to share the unprecedented payoff, they might want to take a page from the book of a middle-aged man in Atlanta who, back in the 1990s, won a $4 million dollar lottery – what was an exceptional amount for the time.
The winner had been working a double shift as a garbage collector. When asked what he intended to do after winning so much money, the man replied, “I’m going to quit one of my shifts.”
“Only one?” asked the incredulous reporter.
“A man has to have work,” replied the new millionaire.
Affluenza: Nothing new but the name
Some verbal atrocities are either too offensive or too absurd to ever be forgotten. Like Jonathan Gruber’s candid admission that “the stupidity of the American voter … was really, really critical for [Obamacare] to pass.” Or Brian Williams misremembering that he had been shot down in a helicopter. Or Al Gore’s claim that he invented the internet (although, in all fairness, that was not quite what he said).
But few violations of common sense and common decency compare to that of Jean Boyd, the judge who concluded that probation and rehab were sufficient punishment for Ethan Crouch — after he pled guilty to taking the lives of four people while driving drunk — because he was a victim of affluenza.
Now, two years later, after Ethan Crouch has violated his parole, fled to Mexico with his mother, and finally ended up back in custody, the Washington Post would like us to reconsider whether the diagnosis is really so ridiculous after all. Rallying experts to support his case, Post editor Fred Barbash suggests that affluenza may indeed be an authentic malady, citing ASU professor of psychology Suniya S. Luthar and Barry Schwartz of Swarthmore College:
“High-risk behavior, including extreme substance abuse and promiscuous sex, is growing fast among young people from communities dominated by white-collar, well-educated parents. These kids … show serious levels of maladjustment as teens, displaying … marijuana and alcohol abuse, including binge drinking [and] abuse of illegal or prescription drugs.”[What also stands out] is the type of rule-breaking – widespread cheating and random acts of delinquency such as stealing from parents or peers among the affluent, as opposed to behavior related to self-defense, such as carrying a weapon, among the inner-city teens.”
“[What also stands out] is the type of rule-breaking – widespread cheating and random acts of delinquency such as stealing from parents or peers among the affluent, as opposed to behavior related to self-defense, such as carrying a weapon, among the inner-city teens.”
And finally: Serious depression or anxiety among affluent kids is “is two to three times national rates.”
No arguments from this quarter. But what does not appear in Mr. Barbash’s lengthy commentary is even the most meager attempt to identify why affluence produces teenage miscreants. What is it about growing up with every possible advantage that predisposes so many children to criminally irresponsible behavior?
The answer is quite simple.
State of the Union: Four Faces of Leadership
If we need another example of how upside-down our culture has become, we only have to look at the hype leading up to tonight’s State of the Union address by soon-to-be Former President Barack Obama. Even as the pundits all agree that the speech will be largely irrelevant and predictable, they can find little else to talk about.
Mr. Obama is expected to tell us how wonderful things are, how many of his goals he has achieved, and how much the quality of our lives has improved since he took office. The success of such an approach depends upon one of three factors:
- that his claims are actually true;
- that he can convince the people that his claims are actually true;
- that he can pound home the message (with the cooperation of an obsequious media) until people think there must be something wrong with them if they don’t believe it.
Whether the president succeeds or not remains to be seen. But it’s illuminating to compare his style to other presidents and presidential hopefuls, past and present.
Yonason Goldson 