Smash and Dream.

Or maybe dream and smash? Angry people often believe that every problem is somebody else’s fault. If they can’t find an avatar scapegoat, they blame immigrants, government, society, or vague cabals. Somebody is obviously making them victims, because they’re not doing as well as mommy and daddy told them they would .

So they dream of a better world, like most of us. But they are certain that vague and evil powers will stop their desires. So first they must smash and destroy everything and rebuild in the rubble for a glorious future .

Oh, sure, lots of people will be hurt and die. Maybe even they will die. But they will be happy martyrs, welcomed into their vision of eternal heaven, admired down the future ages. Happy imaginations .

Usually, they expect that right will prevail. A little because it must be true and right. A lot because its purity will make it a strong survivor. To be honest, most of the greatest smashers also believe they will remain since they are the strongest .

Finally successful. Mommy and daddy must be proud .

And now – all settles down to sweetness and light .

Finally, the right people in charge .

The more things change …

Fantastic Tales

I enjoyed Bible stories as a youth. Then those of the “golden age” of science fiction. Even now some space opera and fantasy. All had little twists and turns, many preached a certain view of society. Fortunately, I never confused them with science or history. Sociology – well that hung out somewhere in the middle .

I know the attraction of all those (mostly) male superheroes or charmed individuals who thrive against all odds. But, again, I rarely confused their exploits with what happened in my real life .

What bothers me now is that many people are overwhelmed with a glut of knowledge that still seems unable to predict their individual future usefully. So they cling to militaristic utopias like Heinlein’s StarshipTroopers. Or unfettered economic systems _ some controlled, some free. Or libertarian or dystopian or … And worse, these become not merely touchstones for their own consciousness, which may be a genuinely useful function, but also a blueprint for how society should really be, or actually is, or how they should act .

Ayn Rand is my personal hate. But any fiction is – really – fiction. Each person is more complex than described in a novel. Each society more chaotically unpredictable. Each solution encrusted with its own problems . And each individual life unique.

But not in these tales. “If only” has replaced “once upon a time” in our current fairy tales .

“If you can keep it”

Franklin’s famous phrase is somewhat opposed to the current meme “rule of law.” In some sense, any organized society lives under a kind of rule of law – laws determined by whoever is in charge, even if the “law” is “I can do whatever I want and you must obey me” .

The founders considered a republic to be based on rights grounded in ideas of liberty. Laws which infringed on that liberty were wrong and should be unenforceable.

Those founders did not see much difference between liberty and “rights” owed to any adult white males living in the country. Those folks were supposed to preserve the idea of liberty (even if they treated women, slaves, etc differently.) Fundamental rights included being able to defend oneself, protect property and contracts, and think and say what you wanted. In a libertarian manner – they did not initially see any need to explicitly enumerate a bill of rights – freedom to do anything that doesn’t harm someone else .

All would of course be forever preserved by the innate virtue of the ruling elite. After the founders finished laughing, they constructed a complicated federal system of checks and balances. Alas, over the years, we have deconstructed most of that in the name of “pure democracy” – what the founders called mob rule.

We may be in the final stages of a semblance of a republic. It was, for a while, a nice nearly working dream .

“Life is short, art is long”

“Life is short, but art is long” is one of those old Roman sayings that seem to make sense until we think about it. Up to a few hundred years ago, people conceived of time much differently than we do. Aboriginal tribes existed in a perpetual present, surrounded by “dreamtime” past and future. Civilized folks considered the past as a few hundred or thousand years – back to the Egyptians or some mythical beginning. Deep philosophers assumed the world to always have been as it is, possibly cycling through various stages .

More than that – in direct opposition to current ideas of progress – that past was always better, golden, inhabited by gods or semi-gods. Ancient art was always to be copied or imitated since the degenerate present could not compete. Thus “art is long”.

Now we laugh at a few thousand years. We know the world goes back a few billion, amazing creatures hundreds of millions, people like us over 100,000. And the world keeps changing. And “new improved” is demonstrably better than the old junk .

As for art … well it’s really as “short” as life. Useful for a generation or so at most. Like any legacy, soon gone with the wind, without even the solace of a grave marker .

As for other ” wise”, “golden”, sayings, ideas, and ideals of classic ancient cultures – don’t get me started .

Chairman Trump

Americans are used to hearing about the “rule of law” which sets the ideals of our Republic above other forms of government. But it seems to have been forgotten that “rule of law” does not mean simply obeying whatever momentary capricious rules are enforced by a government in power. In that sense anyone in an organized state – China North Korea Nazi Germany – lived under a “rule of law.”

The idealized American conception, however, implied more than that. It thought that laws were formulated following certain procedures, that most law was stable, that all classes of people were treated the same and – importantly – that historic “rights” were protected .

When any leader – a king, a military dictator, or a popularly elected official – can arbitrarily not enforce certain laws, artificially enhance others, pardon offenders at will, “go after” enemies legally and economically – that is not what we have considered a “rule of law”. Increasingly, that situation seems to be what we have now .

Elite philosophers through the ages have known that the concept of “rule of law” is fragile. It is hard to establish, easy to destroy. As we are now witnessing .

Lean, Mean, Government

It’s been all the rage for a while for organizations to claim they want to be “lean and mean”. Such a desire will apparently yield greater efficiency, keep costs down, lower prices. What could possibly be wrong with that ?

Not long ago, however, people actually prized other things. They ridiculed those who “knew the price of everything and the value of nothing”. Even today the wealthy expect services far beyond a “wham bam thank you ma’am” approach. We have begun to regret the loss to society as civility has been submerged by nastiness .

More than that, whatever the benefits to a private economic organization, such an approach has never worked socially. “Lean and mean” families generally fall apart or produce monsters. Lean and mean social organizations fail miserably .

So it is with government. As rich technocrats take over and seek to “streamline” everything, they fail to realize that the primary goal of government, as in families and social organizations, is not to produce a product at lowest cost, but to provide a service that keeps a culture healthy, whatever the expense.

Like many slogans, “lean and mean” is a shallow fad of limited utility once the shock wears off and the actual results are evaluated. Even most successful organizations learn they must find ways to happily engage as a collaborative tribal unit. But too often, a lot of things are wrecked before that happens. In a government, that is a massive, and perhaps fatal, tragedy .

Latin and Calculus

Striving suburban schools in the early ’60s would push Latin and calculus on “college track” students. The idea was – as it had been for centuries – that at least it would develop logic skills, language flexibility, and help us think more clearly .

Nowadays these courses are rarely taught in public schools. For one thing there is less overt “tracking” of students supposedly brighter than others. But mostly, Latin and calculus are seen as pretty useless compared to all the things kids “really need to know“.

I admit I’ve rarely used Latin and never touched calculus in almost 70 years. In that sense, I suppose it was wasted time. And yet …

It is good to get a firm logical base. Video games, wrapped in sensory candy, do not have quite the same applicability. The dry, hard exercises of calculus forced one to confront bare bones rules. Latin required a completely new and foreign manner of thinking and writing .

I have over my lifetime frequently felt the effects of that intellectual workout during my adolescence. Clear logic and formal observation of patterns have stayed with me and enriched my consciousness .

I know it’s not for everyone, possibly gone for anyone, but perhaps another meaningful cultural loss in our downward spiral .

Almost Right

People like to seize on the clearest and simplest explanations of phenomena. Things fall to earth because they “want to be nearer to it”. The Earth is flat. Those explanations are, actually, almost right. They are good enough for everyday life. They only fail if one is trying to predict something or control it. Malaria was associated, rightly, with bad air and swamps. Which just happened to also be filled with disease carrying mosquitoes. Avoiding the bad air in season almost worked very well. But it was useless for an eventual solution which required either draining or spraying the swamps.

I’m reminded of this with the MAHA fanatics, who once again want clean, simple explanations to complex problems. They point out that “science was wrong” in believing that COVID 19 was spread by infected air particles (largely able to be stopped by masks) when it was actually conveyed by tiny free floating viruses (against which most masks were useless). MAHA doesn’t believe science should ever be wrong _ if science gives incorrect advice it’s because scientists have nasty secret agendas .

Probably science has become much too complicated for most of us to understand. And it is still notably wrong or incoherent or provisional in many matters of health. So if flat earth and bad air were good enough for our grandparents, folks are sure they should be good enough for us .

Plato

Now that rich white men have seized power, studying dead white men is all the rage. Mostly it’s a social signal to show who has “merit.” Among the things one must know to be admitted to the club is a gloss of Plato .

I’ve read Plato. I found him a boring ignorant old fool. As are the philosophical musings of anything written before the 19th century – particularly before Darwin and Einstein who finally placed humans properly in the universe .

I enthusiastically enjoy history. I freely admit that any human over the last 50,000 years could think as well as I do, experience life just as deeply. People are complex, amazing, and deal with existence in miraculous ways .

But logic – Plato is very logical, for example – is a tricky tool. Useful but easily dangerous. Politicians, preachers, and various madmen are always able to construct wonderful logical castles on completely wrong and stupid foundations. Plato sees visions of “real ideal” and imagines fairy tale perfect men who wisely use logic to rule everything. He includes souls and reincarnation. In fact, he has no idea of everything we actually know about – well – everything .

Oh, there are major things still unknown and maybe unknowable. The nature of time, the meaning of consciousness, the purpose (if any) of life. None of that related to the cold dead weight of writings such as the Republic.

Should Be Better, Could Be Worse

Pop psychology asks “is the glass half empty or half full?” I’m a middling type, so I always thought “both”. I was more aware that by tomorrow the glass might be overflowing, dry, or broken .

I’ve led a fortunate life. One of the great gifts – unappreciated at the time – was a spell of near poverty when I was a young adult. It put some perspective into my outlook. Since then, I’ve always been much more keenly aware of the difficulties others have than of their imagined happiness .

It settled into “should be better, could be worse”. That philosophy has served well at work, raising a family, and now in retirement. Half empty, half full, no matter, adjust and seize the day .

Interestingly, most of it is a simple mental adjustment. After all, a monk sworn to poverty can be quite content. Wealthy people with the world at their fingertips can be neurotically miserable. I’ve cultivated a sense of permanent contentment, as opposed to the militant envy screamed by this culture and its commercials .

Anyway, there the glass sits, inertly evoking whatever mood we desire. That trick of permanent uncertainty and our ability to control how we feel about it is one of the greatest glories of being human .