Politics

Politics and The Psych Degree

by

I got a degree in psychology back in college, looking for a science career, though I eventually went back to my first choice in computing.  Still, I don’t regret the degree at all (a psych degree is actually good as a minor or a complimentary degree for most anything), as it helps me get some great insights into human behavior.

One insight that comes to mind this holiday season is that Freud would have a field day with U.S. politics.

First, there’s the bizarre sexual issues, issues that indicate a kind of regressed or immature sexuality for so many people.  We’re actually to the point where rape being a bad thing is something people discuss as opposed to going “yeah, it’s bad.”  People are freaked out over contraception, something you think we’d be used to by now.

Secondly, there’s the daddy issues, and the press is really bad with this.  There’s the bizarre fawning over machismo which is often false machismo – and then just as soon as people show any machismo, there’s fear of angry daddy.  There’s an acceptance of adolescent posturing on war, and little thought on actual repercussions – I mean seriously, if there’s a war with Iran there will be impacts we have to cope with, whether a war is, was, or will be necessary.

Third, and related, there’s really little talk of long-term planning.  How do we get from A to B?  What of the repercussions?  What of sustainability?  What do we really want to do as opposed to say we’ll do.  Is this policy or that real long-term planning or a dodge?

Now I could have a Freudian field day with a lot of politics, but I suspect one of the big issues is that we don’t want to take a look at the pathological state of our own politics.  We don’t want to confront the immaturity, the parental issues, the regressed adolescent sexual issues, etc.  We know it’s there, but it seems we’re happier playing the games.

I’m not.  A lot of people aren’t.  Perhaps we need to get the media and politicians to catch on . . .

– Steven Savage

Steven Savage is a Geek 2.0 writer, speaker, blogger, and job coach.  He blogs on careers at http://www.fantopro.com/, nerd and geek culture at http://www.nerdcaliber.com/, and does a site of creative tools at http://www.seventhsanctum.com/. He can be reached at https://www.stevensavage.com/.

The Big Score And Bad Economics

by

(Sorry for the delay in posts, been a tad busy!)

Economic policies, economic choices like careers and business plans, are of utmost importance in life.  Sun Tzu may have talked the importance of war, but I wish the guy had taken a little more time to focus on economic issues as well.  Then again he was kind of busy being brilliant.*

When one considers economic issues in a society, the most important thing is sustainability – can one maintain a functional system or even enhance it over time.   This is necessary to society as society itself is essentially a long-term thing – no long-term economics, no society as many nations have found out throughout history.  When there is no planning and cultivating of a sustainable economy (or half-baked planning constrained by ignorance, ideology, or moral faults) there is no stability, no success, and no society.

Needless to say I see great examples of bad planning and bad policy today.  Hopefully you see them, but by now fish may have no word for water.**

There are many reasons for that, but one thing I feel should be examined – and which is not examined as much as it should be – is the idea of the “Big Score.”

The “Big Score” permeates our culture and our economic culture.  It’s the lottery win, the perfect IPO release, the Big Novel that makes you famous for life.  It’s the idea of having the bit, the big victory, and then everything will be fine.  It’s the economic version of the Rapture.

In the small, the “Big Score” is believing that college degree will set you for life – and in the large it is the idea that our student loan bubble won’t hurt “us.”  In the small, the “Big Score” is the idea of the IPO that’ll make you rich forever, and in the large everyone thinking they’ll be the next Facebook before the VC pulls out.  In the small, the “Big Score” is hoping for a piddly tax break you’re convinced will jump start the economy forever, while wondering what happened to the school system.

In a way, the “Big Score” is the Winner-Take-All/Superstar effect internalized.  It’s the idea you will/can triumph and have it all fantastic forever.  You just need to get there “once”, forgetting plenty of others want to get there too.

Of course we don’t get there.  We don’t build a sustainable system, a sustainable economy, a sustainable career, a sustainable life.  We focus too much on the low-chance “Big Score” and not enough on the possibility of a sustainable economy or economic life.

Then we wonder what happened.

– Steven Savage

Steven Savage is a Geek 2.0 writer, speaker, blogger, and job coach.  He blogs on careers at http://www.fantopro.com/, nerd and geek culture at http://www.nerdcaliber.com/, and does a site of creative tools at http://www.seventhsanctum.com/. He can be reached at https://www.stevensavage.com/.

* I do recommend reading “The Art Of War” so you can know about what everyone pretends they read.

** I could have made an “underwater housing” joke here, but didn’t.  You’re welcome.

The Debate Died Early

by

The Obama/Romney debate was unimpressive (big looser?  Jim Lehrer).  From what I hear about the Stewart/O’Reilly debate it was livlier but uninsipriing.  Everyone’s already talking Twitter, Facebook, and how that impacts the debates.  Big Bird is a meme, the Stewart/O’Reilly debate’s technical glitches are being discussed, and the debates kind of fade away.

I miss the idea of good, substantial debate.  Catchphrases, bumper stickers, and blatant lies aren’t exactly the substance of great historical import.  Neither is statistics diddling or mathematical games.

So I began speculating that perhaps the internet is replacing debates.  There you can post length discussions and link to numbers.  There the dialog is ongoing.  There things happen.

My answer to this is, possibly, yes.  But I don’t think the internet killed the debate.

I think that it died a lot earlier in our media.

Everything is turned into media sound bites, spectacle, and sensationalism, and our supposed politics and policies aren’t much different.  It’s an age of sensationalism and catchphrases, of what makes audiences angry over any kind of discussion, of what sells ad time.  Politics is entertainment – it’s always been, but it’s pretty much merged as far as I’m concerned, accelerated by television, media empires, and 24-hour news cycles people have to fill.

Worse, it’s a mix of advertising and reality television.

To put the final capper on it, it’s been entertainment long enough for people to imitate it.  You’ve heard the catchphrases bubble up in people’s political discussions.  You know the people who ape their favorite media-news pundits.  This reality-TV politics has infected us.

So debates are dead.  We just started killing them early – and I think the internet is replacing the gap.

Even if that gap sometime is using LOLCats as template for political discussions.

– Steven Savage

Steven Savage is a Geek 2.0 writer, speaker, blogger, and job coach.  He blogs on careers at http://www.fantopro.com/, nerd and geek culture at http://www.nerdcaliber.com/, and does a site of creative tools at http://www.seventhsanctum.com/. He can be reached at https://www.stevensavage.com/.