Does Your Opinion Matter?

Much of what I write about in this blog is directed toward shaping your opinion.  Not making it the same as mine, just trying to get you to base it on something other than your initial impression, which is largely simple emotion.  Your opinion should be based on facts, reasoning, objectivity.  These are "archaic" concepts that used to be thrown around by some guys (before the era of television news) named Plato, Aristotle, Socrates.  Remember them?  Their philosophy was used by the founders of this country as the basis for our constitution and bill of rights.

But why am I working so hard on this?  Does your opinion matter?  What if I suggested it might be the ONLY thing that matters?  You may not be in a position of power or influence, but notice that in actuality those people follow public opinion rather than leading it.  They live and die by polls.  No, the main source of change in society is the accumulation of public opinion.  If the public or some large segment thereof deems a behavior or a manner of speaking to be acceptable then it is.  It doesn't matter how trivial, meaningless, or even destructive it may be.  If you don't believe this, I have two words for you: reality shows.  Conversely, many people lose their jobs these days by expressing opinions - or many times facts - that the public or a vocal minority does not want to hear.  Freedom of speech be damned.

So if you believe you have the right to vote and that your one vote matters among the thousands or millions that are cast, then you have to believe that your one small opinion is contributing to the overall trends that you see in society.  Many of which you may not like.  Have you ever found yourself making excuses for someone just because you know them, like them or feel sorry for them?  Do you know any liability lawyers who have made their fortune on spurious claims or class action suits where each of a million plaintiffs gets about 5 bucks and the lawyers make two million - are you still friends with them?  How about just someone who is collecting disability even though they are working under that table at some very physical job?  Are you nice to them?

A strange assumption has been made in recent years that everyone deserves respect and that it is very, very bad to voice or show disapproval of someone's lifestyle or behavior.  Well if everyone is so pleasant to thieves, leeches and parasites, and they're making money, why on earth would they stop?  There are a lot of behaviors that are not illegal, simply immoral and destructive.  No one can possibly anticipate everything that some scoundrel will try to do and pass a law ahead of time.  And even when there are laws covering misdeeds, no one can find and prosecute them all.  The simple fact is that you cannot legislate morality.  The only thing that has ever controlled that is public opinion.

To a large extent, our society operates on an honor system.  You might recently have heard the word "honor", but it is unfashionable and poorly understood.  It means that people are expected to do what is right based on their sense of honor, of wanting to be respected and admired - or even just accepted - in society.  In societies where honor is an important concept, this works pretty well.  A densely populated country like Japan, which has survived for many centuries, can only do so when people act honorably.

So you are doing a public service and your civic duty when you openly disapprove of or reject immoral behavior that is destructive to society - especially when you express that opinion directly to the person committing that behavior.  But now you have the responsibility to react objectively and with reason, not just on your emotional reaction.  Why am I always bashing emotions?  Next time.....

Is It OK to Lie?

Faithful followers of this blog (all four of you) will note that I have not written for a while.  Partly I've been very, very busy.  Partly I was overwhelmed by a veritable tidal wave of lies and outright propaganda in the news that appeared to drown out my still, small voice of reason. On the one hand, Acorn CEO Bertha Lewis called the Tea Party a "bowel movement" and a return to segregation and McCarthyism at a meeting of the Young Democratic Socialists.  On the other Lloyd Blankfein, head of Goldman Sachs, insisted at a congressional hearing that they did nothing wrong by packaging bad mortgages as a financial derivative, rating the quality way too highly, and selling it to their investors while betting against it in their own portfolios.  It was only the wonderfully supportive thoughts and opinions of a longtime friend that convinced me to trudge onward against the tsunami and at least carry my message to those extreme few who are still interested in using their minds and not just their "hearts".

So, is lying OK?  Before you answer "no, of course not", consider whether public statements of the type mentioned above have ever touched an emotional chord in you and caused you a rush of guilty pleasure - even though you should have known they were preposterous.  (If you weren't going to answer "of course not", please stop reading and return to your television show, copy of USA Today, porn surfing, or whatever other highly inspirational activity really appeals to you).

The problem, as I mention often, is that emotions are easier and more fun than rational thought and much easier to prey upon by public figures with an agenda.  If you approve or accept the ones that appeal to you, you have no right to object to the ones from the other side.  Worse, you are helping to perpetuate a societal norm that is causing ever greater polarization in our country and making it impossible to accomplish any real good.  We can't have (and generally no longer do have) anything that qualifies as a "discussion" in our public arena because you can't discuss emotions - they only belong to the individual.  Certainly never in our political arena where winning a "victory" for your party comes before any sort of benefit to the country as a whole.  And never in the media, where facts and even whole stories are omitted if they would be damaging to the point of view of the reporters or media outlet.  And by the way, omission of significant facts that would alter the perception of a situation DOES qualify as lying because the purpose of doing so is to deceive someone into believing in something that is already known to not be entirely true.

The only way to not buy into this whole scheme is to try to get real facts and form an objective opinion on your own (rememember - my religion is objectivity).  You CANNOT do this by simply listening to the information sources that you agree with and make you feel happy.  I listen to both NPR and Fox Talk Radio pretty much every day.  Add a little uncommon sense and read between the lines and you can generally tell what is really going on and who is trying to sell you what.  Give it a try, stretch your comfort zone, keep an open mind, and see what you might learn!

By the way - does your opinion matter?  More than you can possibly know.  Stay tuned.