Culture contradiction

It's depressing to realize that our "democracy" is based on who can lie the best, and who has the most money for ad campaigns. The very system is set up so that potential candidates have to raise a certain amount of money to even get in the race, and the ones with the most money can buy the most TV spots. This means that our society and government are a real-life game of Monopoly. Whoever has the most money wins. That's it. There are no points awarded for being a good person or having character. No "Life Tiles" that put a value on good actions and count towards winning the game. Take Randy Kuhl vs. Eric Massa. Massa had the high ground everywhere. He is a veteran, a Democrat. He had Hillary Clinton, who was re-elected by a very comfortable margin, and former President Bill Clinton, who everyone is ready to canonize in hindsight, supporting him. Randy Kuhl, on the other hand, made no secret of his allegiance to the Bush Administration with its abysmal approval ratings. He even had Dick Cheney with his 18% approval rating come and support him. And this is New York, not the deep south. Why didn't Massa win? I can only assume that it was because Kuhl had a lot more money to throw around.

So this means that our government is not representative at all because money is in control- both behind the scenes and in the light of day. And partisanship turns politics into a high stakes Yankees vs. Red Sox game. No surprises here for anyone who's even slightly paying attention. But there are not enough people doing that

The odd thing is that, while marketing supports the "Monopoly" theme of money worship, all of our "cultural" media, like movies, showcase the opposite message. The underdog wins. Good people are rewarded. Love conquers all. True democracy is superior and will light the way for everyone else. A "Monopoly" themed movie would have Donald Trump triumph over Mother Theresa. And that would be accurate, because that IS our reality. But no one would ever make a movie like that. We don't see ourselves that way. And most people claim to follow a religion that tells them rich men can't get into heaven, you should be a servant to your fellow man, turn the other cheek, and abandon possessions to follow Him.

If you ask any person on the street whether Monopoly represents the way one should live their life, most people will tell you no. There's love and family and (for most people) this nebulous idea of an afterlife. We know on some level that winning at Monopoly wouldn't equal winning in real life because "you can't take it with you." And if you asked them whether they admire Mother Theresa or Donald Trump more, I think the majority of average Americans would say Mother Theresa.

So there ARE stories out there that convey the right message. What's the secret to why some work and others don't? Why do we root for Tom Hanks in the movie "Philadelphia" and want nothing to do with those with AIDS in real life? Why do we root for true love? Why do we root for the person on the side of "good"? (My movie analogy stops short at war movies because they usually glorify our past victories and demonize our enemies. Except for Vietnam movies that show just how awful it was to be a soldier there.) But you get the picture, imperfect analogy notwithstanding. I think the potential is there, because our "values" are in the right place. Just look at what the Republicans accomplished by calling their party the "Moral Values" party. There have been attempts by Democrats to frame the budget, international policy and addressing social problems as "Moral Values" issues. To break through the contradiction. The Evangelical minister Jim Wallis has a great book on this.

Anyway, I guess what I wonder is how to reconcile this contradiction. I know a large amount of it is denial, and that people would much rather go on believing that America is a great free country; a democracy, and have moral superiority over everyone else. They'd rather believe what they're being told on the surface than dig into the truth. The truth would take them way the heck out of their comfort zone. No, they'd rather think that they're Christian because they attend church every Christmas and Easter. And the rest of the time, they'd rather immerse themselves in escapist pursuits that make them feel better. It astounds me how much time, money and effort are wasted on things that are completely irrelevant, and don't matter at all. Like sports. Or TV and movie stars. Shows like American Idol and Survivor. The movie "American Dreamz was such an excellent social commentary- the president had to appear on an "American Idol" type show to reach the public. And the amount of effort people spend deconstructing "Harry Potter" and "Lord of the Rings" is really confusing when you consider that it doesn't matter at all.

But when you realize the lengths people go to in order to be comfortable, maybe it isn't so surprising. Mentally juxtapose this lifestyle with what it was like a century ago. We can't imagine living without all the comforts electricity brings, yet burning fossil fuels is killing us in more ways than one. We can't imagine living without cars yet we pay a fortune to own and power them, and they kill an insane amount of people. We have turned comfort into an art form. It's an inalienable right.

Some activists seem to think that getting the truth out there will be enough to change people's minds. I believe that nothing short of hijacking media and bending it our way will change anything. There may be a way for celebrity types to make a difference, and not in the Reagan or Schwartzenegger way. In the Bono way. Most people need to follow a leader, and need to be told what's right and wrong. Any wishy-washy appearing "think for yourself" leftist will never get the job done. Again, see: Republican party rule. George Clooney's on his way, how about him? We need to reframe the whole thing. The problem is, I don't know that it can be accomplished using pure motives and tactics. Like all truth, no spin. Education. Speaking truth to power has not been enough. What about speaking truth to the masses? Are we truly, as a race, good enough for the realization of true rightness to change things? Or are we too selfish to get there without being coerced?

You might just be a leftie!

If all the films netflix recommends for you are indy documentaries…

If there’s no more room on your car for that great bumper sticker…

If you subscribe to The Nation instead of your local paper…

If the only TV news you watch is fake…

OR

If you actually get that Colbert is being funny…

If your dearest dream is to have solar panels on your roof, a Hybrid in your garage and a bomb shelter in your basement…

If you’re on the no-fly list and the NSA is tapping your phone…

If your friends are already rolling their eyes and you’ve barely opened your mouth…

If you have the urge to flip off anyone driving a Hummer…

In Defense of Environmentalists

So ever wonder why environmentalists are predominantly white middle class? There are a couple of reasons for this. First is that the environmental message is not promoted by mainstream media, and indoctrination is mostly through self-education. Sometimes you get exposure through college campuses. Sometimes, you’re just educated enough to smell a rat in the corporate message. The environmental movement has been anathema to business. Big business has run rampant lately, and they have been systematically eliminating their challengers- government regulations, unions. We’re the only ones left scoring any victories.

I was stunned to learn that 50% of Americans report an income of less than $30,000. Only 27.5% of people age 25 and older have finished four years of college. Middle class isn’t majority status anymore- it’s elite.

How can the majority of people with these demographics self-educate and buck the companies that write their paychecks? It’s back to Maslow’s Hierarchy. For most people, it’s just not possible to spontaneously reach the level of knowledge and awareness required to be a treehugger (so I apologize for my former 5-year old comment). Environmentalists cannot continue to think that they are functioning in a vacuum. Someone in my local Sierra Club said that we should keep our attention on environmental issues instead of being distracted by things like the war. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The good news is that there is a huge potential for change. You have your pick of reasons: global warming, pollution, skyrocketing energy prices, looming peak oil, the Middle East mess…. It doesn’t matter which one. We need to change a lot of things. A lot of new stuff has to be made. Manufacturing jobs can come back. Profitability is inextricably linked to environmental awareness now.

And how to increase this awareness? If it’s not on TV, it isn’t happening. We need a media champion. May I suggest Dave Matthews. That band manages to be mind-blowingly popular despite getting next to zero radio air play. They are already popular with the 30-something set, and still reach the upcoming generation. They can do for this energy thing what Bono did for Africa; what Coldplay is doing for fair trade.

The doomsday scenario isn’t working. All the people attracted to a cause by doomsday scenarios are already in the environmental movement. For most people, it just isn’t the best way to convince them. You know- you catch more flies with honey. It’s actually extremely counterproductive with the evangelicals because the potential massive destruction and the Middle East tie all smack of the rapture.

I propose instead a vision of prosperity, widespread education and clean environment. Picture any futuristic movie with sparkling blue skies and silent pollution-free transport and it’s not much of a reach. Here’s how it goes: There has been a flight of businesses and well-off property owners away from cities, to corporate parks and cul-de-sac developments built on what used to be farmland. Highways have been built around the cities so you can fly past at 65 mph. There’s no reason to be invested if you’re not immersed in it. Since education funding is based on property taxes, taking the wealth from cities also takes funding required for anyone to get ahead. (It’s funny- in thriving cities like New York and Chicago, residential costs are too high. In dying cities like Buffalo and Rochester, it’s not high enough.)

Combine that with the loss of blue collar manufacturing jobs (with decent pay and benefits), the upsurge in non-benefitted temporary positions and the active campaign against unions. So there’s no blue collar jobs and very poor quality education. What else are people going to do? Crime offers them a way to make a living. To reverse this trend, make cities thriving centers again. Use mass transit so people can go through the city instead of around it. They can check out all those neat little boutiques and coffee shops. Be metro-sexual or whatever. Catch the upcoming manufacturing wave for products that capture renewable energy, and hybrid and electric cars. Bring the jobs and the dollars back to the cities. The only reason why sprawl and McMansions are attractive is because there are few good residential options in the city. And crime makes it scary. And the school systems blow. It’s not location. I don’t know one person that loves their commute to work from a distant suburb.

The political climate is changing. People are fed up with big business running our government. This financially-managed approach to government is a failed experiment. Change is possible. Who would have thought 20 years ago that recycling would be second nature to even the most anti-environmental person? Five cents made all the difference. Who would have thought that the world would have been able to come to a consensus on banning CFCs?

Environmentalists need to come out of their box and take a look at the interplay between the economy, education, politics, wars and the environment. Am I unaffected by the doomsday scenarios? Not at all. I look at the blue skies and the trees, and I think about how much I want my kids, and their kids to be able to experience this too.