Yes, Things Suck But...

 Things do suck and they probably will continue to do so. Now, what are we going to do about it when people are telling you the real problems aren't the ones you face daily? For instance, when ads on TV tell you that left- or right-wing agendas are going to ruin "our democracy" what do you even do with that information? Our democracy is already ruined by those gatekeepers of government who depend on corporate interests to be elected and re-elected, to be recommended to judgeships, and to be named to important decision-making commissions. It is ruined by underfunding or undermining government protections of people and the environment. It is ruined by nationalism over globalism. So yes, things do suck, but not for the reasons that campaign ads that we are being drowned in say they do. Because mostly, they don't have much to do with the things we worry about on a daily basis.

A big reason that they suck is we no longer vote solely for issues that affect us, but for the perception that one party or person is the only true protector of our way of life. We are consumer tribalists. That is we are predisposed to thinking that one party or person is cool and the other is not. We are being sold imagery (homespun images of farms, flannel, and family or shady images of scary-looking people with bleak voice-overs telling us how they threaten our existence) and framed issues with talking points that are focus-grouped in a way that soon enough we repeat them aloud as if they were our own ideas.

When people say we are sheeple, they may not be wrong (though they may also be sheeple for repeating it because they heard it someplace on the internet). And maybe if we would embrace our sheeple-ness, we could do better. Sheep hang together, they frolic, and yes, they stray (but can be brought back into the fold with proper coaxing). We want to believe we are individualists because you guessed it, that has been the message we have gotten in choosing blue jeans, as well as what our history books mostly taught us. Sheep are social beings and so are we. I am pretty sure sheep don't do everything in lockstep and we don't have to either. Nonetheless, we do have to decide to stop the suck.

If things suck, it is because we are overwhelmed by the enormity of the problems we face. Who wants to figure out what to do about the overcrowding of the planet, the neverending diaspora of people, the lack of drinkable water, the escalating planetary temperatures, the limited arable land, the constant warring, etc. when we can boil elections down to how bad candidate a is and how great candidate b is at defending our freedoms? We have been told that freedom is the most important thing we can fight for, but not how awesome the responsibility of what we do with that freedom can be. We auction off the future of our offspring for the promise of the quick fix of the moment and somehow think that is the best use of our freedom?

Maybe we just suck? We suck because we want others to fix things for us or leave it to us to fix them ourselves. We suck because if it takes a village, someone has to want to build the village (and make sure everyone has a hut). We suck because we listen to the fearmongering voices and think, "hmm, maybe I am superior than the person who will cancel out my vote." We suck because we pretend that others are the cause of why things suck when it is actually a tautology of sucking. We suck because we suck.

But we don't have to suck. We do have to hold those we elect accountable for doing fewer things that suck for us all. We do have to vote, even when it sucks to do so. We do have to call bullshit when we see it, including on people who are choosing to be a posse that stops us from exercising our important freedoms (like voting and speaking up at public forums). We can actually research issues and be informed about what we are voting for or against. We can ask to be on commissions, run for school boards, and volunteer at polls. We don't have to believe in the inherent good or bad of people, we do have to act on our own hopes. At the end of the day, if things suck, it is because we allowed the suck to win. And nothing will ever suck harder than that.

A Government "Shutdown" of a Different Kind

What a week it has been and not a whole lot to be supercharged about. SCOTUS has said that you can pretty much carry a gun anywhere you want except near their homes and other "sensitive" areas. You realize that justice is not blind, but is being blinded by the Six Stooges that are the majority opinion of the aforementioned case. 

At about the same time that Congress takes action on sensible gun laws, the courts decide to become activists for gun rights. Is this coincidental or a way to allow the Republicans to say "Well, at least I tried--but the SCOTUS knows better, I guess"? This political impotence is dangerous to democracy and having a religiously-bent, free-market-leaning Supreme Court just exacerbated this. 

Add to it the circus of Congressional hearings that will likely not lead to anybody being convicted of anything and at the least, opens the window for profiting from decidedly criminal behavior, particularly if the mid-term elections are the bloodbath that is being "predicted" by the media and pollsters.

Then stir in profiteers who are making money and flaming inflation in their wakes and whose campaign contributions make it difficult to go after for ripping all of us off. Even the Federal Reserve Bank admits that hoisting interest rates won't help us out on gas and groceries, but will likely keep people out of housing that they are already having a hard time affording. So there's that.

So what do we have to look forward to? Essentially a government "shutdown" by being made impotent through greed, power grabs, and flagging belief in it as an institution by a weary public. And this is the tip of the proverbial iceberg as other rights will likely be dissembled by the social architects in judges' robes (the next being Roe V. Wade). In so doing, the patriarchs and oligarchs win and democracy fails unless we stop rewarding the corrupt by throwing the wrong "bums" out. Mid-term elections are not glamorous, but they are important nonetheless. Hold the line while we still have a line to hold.

Backing Off Backlash

Isaac Newton's 3rd law of motion is "for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction". Where social movements are concerned, for every Black life that matters, there is a Blue life that matters. More broadly, for every progressive step forward, there is a regressive step backward. And so it goes on in equilibrium and disequilibrium. Everybody feels backlash, but not everybody experiences it personally or as deeply. Why is this?

I think that it is largely socioeconomic--the whiter and richer you are, the more insulated you are from the effects of backlash. The so-called cancel culture is real, but it is a two-sided coin.  Left- and right-winged people cancel on a regular basis, but the idea of cancel culture is owned by the right-leaning folks by the way they frame it. Cancel culture from the left to them is anti-freedom, but when they do it, it is pro-freedom. Kind of slick to use the idea of freedom as a bludgeon and a value, right?

The corrosive thing about backlash is that it cedes no middle ground. It takes complex ideas and complex people and reduces them to doing good or evil. Well-meaning people can do and say very uninformed things and can even act in ways that are heinous in the eye of the beholder. But rather than to see it as a moment to clarify and educate, quite often, it is a moment of condemnation. While I believe that there are absolutely good reasons to ultimately condemn others who are creating real harm, in most cases, there is room for helpful dialogue.

So how do we go from the backlash to finding common ground? First, we recognize that canceling others is a politically motivated act; that is, we hold our viewpoint to be superior to another no matter what because our side is right and they are wrong. What if both of our viewpoints are flawed? Two, we recognize our humanity--we are all people who have pain points and each of us makes our stands based on what we know or are told. Third, we have a common enemy--misinformation. If we are using the same information, then our reactions are based on our philosophical differences, not the source of information.

Will this be easy? I'll readily agree it will not be. For one reason, we lack trust and everything ultimately can be politicized or worse, turned partisan. This is why I think it has to begin with pairs of differing people rather than a large group process. Trust in a group is harder to form than a one-on-one interaction. I think back to the former governor of Alabama, George Wallace, a staunch segregationist, who ultimately renounced his position largely due to the efforts of Shirley Chisholm who visited him after he survived an assassination attempt and shocked him by being at his side despite his stances.  Through this encounter, his stances drastically changed to the point that, in his last term as governor, he nominated a record number of Black people to state commissions and renounced segregation. Dr. Martin Luther King once said, “Forgiveness does not mean ignoring what has been done or putting a false label on an evil act. Rather, it means that the evil act no longer remains as a barrier to the relationship. Forgiveness is a catalyst creating the atmosphere necessary for a fresh start and a new beginning. Forgiveness means reconciliation, a coming together again. Without this, no man can love his enemies.”