By Tom Kando
The 1976 movie Network was not as good as many people think. It is best remembered for News anchorman Peter Finch’s famous words, “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take this anymore.”
This was a safe and meaningless outcry, because the movie never said what he - and you - were supposed to be mad about.
This reminds me of the mindless anger of many people today, especially those enamored by demagogues like Glenn Beck and the always-angry Sarah Palin. (She recently asked for White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel’s firing because of some foul language he used in a meeting).
I see angry folks like that in the news - the Tea Party people are a prime example - and in my dentist’s waiting room. An old geezer maybe, who seems to be really mad at the world (I’m also an old geezer, but my brain hasn’t atrophied that much, yet). These old geezers are angry, but they don’t know at whom, or why. Is it incipient Alzheimer’s? Some variant of Tourette’s Syndrome?
I can imagine the following conversation with one of them:
After watching the news for a moment on the TV set in the waiting room, he looks away, disgusted, and mumbles, “they should all be shot!”
I ask, “who should be shot?”
“All of them!”
“Why?”
“They’re all a bunch of crooks and thieves and liars. I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take this anymore.”
“What are you mad about?”
“The whole corrupt mess, the politicians, and the media, and all the big shots. They are all in cahoots together. The country is going to hell in a handbasket. And the kids are no good. They only care about drugs and sex anymore...”
“So the problem is with the politicians and with the kids?”
“...and the lawyers, and the professors, and the government, and Wall Street, and the media, and Hollywood...”
“Anybody else?”
“Yeah, everybody else, too!”
“But not you?”
“Nah, I’m okay...I keep my nose clean...”
“Mmm...So what should be done?”
This is the level of political sophistication around us. Inchoate rage. Solutions? Zero. Just say no to everything. Propose a plan of action? Never. Blame everyone else? Sure. Might you be part of the problem? No way!
Anger and frustration during this terrible economic recession are understandable. But this unfocused, uninformed, nihilistic anger is part of the disease, not the cure. leave comment here
4 comments:
Tom, you said it so well.
It's so unproductive, to say no to everything.
Oh come on Tom, admit it: you’re the old angry frustrated guy…all anyone has to do is go back and read your blog entries to see your increasing frustration and anger as your secular savior is rejected. I, as a conservative, am an old happy guy – the more the country gets frustrated with the government the better for us. I love gridlock - when the government does nothing, we win! Obama, Pelosi, and Reed have failed on health care, employment, cap and trade, Copenhagen global warming, bringing the Olympics to Chicago, closing Guantanamo, terror trials in New York, handling of the underwear terrorist, etc and wait until the fallout if they try to end the Bush tax cuts. This is a right of center country that voted for a neophyte and his liberal cohorts out of racial guilt and now regrets that decision. The pendulum is swinging back, and I love it. Listen to Rush and see how much we’re enjoying this…it’s the libs that want the government to do things that are growing angry.
You are right that there is no constructive place for mindless anger in politics. Glen Beck's rants are those of a guy that never formally got beyond high school. Yet he resonates with many who feel that Washington is broken.
The Tea Party movement may contain its share of whackos, but it is a strong movement not to be underestimated. David Brooks of the New York Times recently said that he originally did not take it seriously, but that he was wrong. It reflects a growing distrust of Washington and a desire to see it constructively reformed. Most people are middle class patriotic citizens that feel they are losing their country. Brooks put the number of Americans in sympathy with the Tea Party objectives at 60%.
Sarah Palin spoke at the national Tea Party event, but many people feel this was a betrayal of the Tea Parties and many see her as a neo-con plant trying to hijack the Tea Party Movement and pull it into the Big Government wing of Republican Party.
Thank you for your comments. Anonymous says the usual things. They require little response, as the issues he mentions are well known.
What Gordon says about the Tea Party people is more interesting. My problem, though, is that I have no idea what these people's objectives are, besides saying no.
At least Gordon and I agree about Sarah Palin's lack of qualifications. Chris Matthews recently called her an empty receptacle. That's exactly
what she is. An even simpler way to describe her is: IGNORANT. The danger of handing over the helm of state to someone who may be jovial and friendly, but utterly ignorant, was demonstrated by George W. Bush.
Post a Comment
Please limit your comment to 300 words at the most!