by Tom Kando
I was chatting with a Republican friend at my health club. Just a friendly chat, nothing political. I mentioned that our newspaper - the Sacramento Bee - is going down, like so many other newspapers, due to the Internet revolution. For instance, our newspaper is discontinuing Saturday deliveries. I told my friend that I deplore this, because I enjoy reading a printed newspaper with my morning coffee rather than reading from my computer screen. Also, I want to get the local news.
His reply was that newspapers are useless anyway, because they are just a bunch of lies and propaganda.
This reminded me of Trump, who believes and says that the media are the enemy of the people, echoing what dictators have said throughout history.
This is, of course, a falsehood. The truth is the opposite. A free press and the first amendment are the most important guarantee that our society remains a democracy and that people remain informed. American newspapers distinguish between facts and opinions. The latter are on the editorial and opinion pages. The American press - the Fourth Estate - is our democracy’s life jacket. The fact that many millions of Americans believe the opposite, along with the president, is tragic. These people’s preferred source of information is the Internet, which is incredibly unreliable. While digital has the advantage of providing access to many different news outlets, I am not sure that most people bother to discriminate between (correct) information and misinformation, both of which are plentiful on the Internet.
This prompted me to make a list of other similar myths, stupid and wrong beliefs, to which vast numbers of Americans - possibly a majority - subscribe:
Error #2: “The government is the problem, not the solution.” We can thank Ronald Reagan for popularizing this stupidity.
One does not need to have read Thomas Hobbes and John Locke to understand the “Social Contract” theory: In order for society to function harmoniously and for citizens to thrive, they must give up some of their freedoms and accept cooperation, law and order - in other words Government. As Thomas Hobbes phrased it, without this compromise, human life would remain nasty, brutish and short. In the state of nature, man’s life is a war of all against all.
The social contract theory remains foundational. It is a legacy of the Age of Enlightenment, of which America’s Founding Fathers were also an eminent manifestation. This is what anti-government zealots have been turning their back on, ever since Reagan.
Error #3: “All politicians are crooks.” Folksy figures such as Mark Twain and Will Rogers popularized this stereotype, but there is no clear evidence that it is true. Sure, some politicians are corrupt, but as a class, it isn’t clear that they are more so than, say, businessmen, lawyers, cops and other occupations.
Error #4. “Unions are bad.” Again, what is the evidence for this generalization? Some unions have been bad in the sense of being criminally corrupt, like the Teamsters Union in the past. But the most frequent charge in recent decades is that unions such as those that represent teachers and public employees are too powerful, and that they impose their agenda upon the public.
The truth is that Union membership in the US has declined from 35% in 1954 to 10.5% in 2018, with a concomitant decline in workers’ earnings and unions’ power and impact on politics. The US has one of lowest rates of unionization among OECD countries. (See Union Membership ).
Error #5: “You don’t need a college degree to be successful.” All statistics show the very strong correlation between income and educational level. It is what it is. I may agree with those of you who feel that we should not expect everyone to have a college preparatory education. An industrial arts apprenticeship path, such as in Germany and Switzerland, would be great. However, that’s not where America is at, right now.
Error #6: “Guns don’t kill people; People kill people.” Wrong again. The fundamental fact is this: The more guns there are among a given population, the more people will be murdered by guns in that population. Simple.
Error #7: “If you are poor, it’s your fault.” By and large, poverty is inherited, as is wealth. Again, statistical probabilities have long demonstrated the partial contributions made by a host of factors to people’s economic success and failure. The role of individual effort is dwarfed by background factors such as race, gender and most of all social class.
Error #8: Immigrants bring in trouble, they “infect” American society and they are a burden on taxpayers. The opposite is true: Immigrants’ crime rate is lower than that of the general population. Their contribution to the economy is disproportionately greater than their number.
There are many other errors which many or most people believe to be true, myths which I won’t touch. They include people ‘s beliefs about religion, God, race, sex and assorted other topics. But my comments about these erroneous beliefs might get me in trouble.
Anyway, you get my drift: At the core of today’s political crisis is the fact that too many people subscribe to erroneous beliefs.
© Tom Kando 2019;All Rights Reserved
leave comment here
11 comments:
Tom, You are right that newspapers (and magazines and book publishers) are struggling financially because of online media. As a result they are getting more desperate to garner readers and it seems that more sensational and partisan headlines reflect that desperation. The answers to your questions are not simple either/or answers. There are partial truths underlying partisan rhetoric, and one makes no progress towards truth by making absolutes ou of the partisan rhetoric that is highly biased by financial interests.
I thank Gordon for his comments. I suppose newspapers such as the New York Times, the Washington Post and the Sacramento Bee can be seen as partisan (as can the Wall Street Journal, a fortiori). I’m not sure that they blatantly distort or sensationalize facts in that effort, or that this has become a trend. True, most media are generally either on the Democratic or on the Republican side.
My admittedly provocative format, in this post, has a purpose:
Equivocation and bending over backwards to recognize “both sides” of issues is as wrong as blatant partisanship.
Many media are actually afraid of being seen as biased - an impulse opposite to what the “liberal media” are accused of.
Yet there are many issues where there is no place for equivocation, issues to which there are not two sides. For example climate change, the treatment of blacks by the criminal justice system, growing economic inequality, violence against women, the mass murder epidemic, etc.
To his credit, Gordon continues to engage in dialogue, which I greatly appreciate.
Thanks for your thoughtfulness, and for sharing this. This is a very thoughtful piece.
Excellent! This post makes perfect sense. And it's a wonderful summary of prevailing "crazy thinking." People are very strange. Barry
Tom, I love how you stick up for the "downtrodden" when there is so much misinformation... and challenge the negative assumptions/beliefs that are so easy to glibly repeat. You offer another alternative if anyone is willing to at least entertain them... and invite a respectful dialogue.
Tom, I agree with you that equivocation or bending over backward to recognize both sides isn't healthy. My goal would be to understand the larger picture, which neither political side attempts to develop. Thus, I would support integration rather the equivocation; an integral wholistic approach to truth.
Hi Tom,
Your whole testament will get you in trouble. Oh, anyone, don't use the email below to reply. I almost never look at that account. I don't know why it came up.
Dave
Well said. I agree totally. Thank you.
Tom, We are with you in all of the concerns you mentioned. We both like to read the newspaper with our coffee in the morning. It is frightening to hear people say what your friend said. Some of these people are good friends and good people. It is hard to think they can believe what they do. It is also frightening!
Speaking of the Wall Street Jounral, which does have Saturday delivery, I once assigned it along with a book I edited on the political economy of the U.S. The class had a number of Ford executives from Kansas City in the class. Their task was to either confirm or refute the theses laid out in the book (mostly Marxist), using the WSJ. Guess what? They confirmed Marx's ideas about the economy. So, tell your friend to read the news in the WSJ and skip the editorials; it may be a learning lesson for him.
Cheers
Hi Scott,
That’s a great experiment.
I have also observed, at times, that successful businessmen agree with a Marxian analysis of Capitalism, while vehemently favoring its continued existence. Self-interest?
On a different subject:
I don’t know why this upsets me so much: The news (again) about Americans’ DECLINING life expectancy – particularly among white males aged 25-60.
The country is falling further and further behind Japan, Europe, Canada, etc. now 3 or 4 years behind already… Isn’t this one of the most important indicators that there is something really, really serious ailing our society?
(Russia’s demographic decline similarly shows how sick that country is, no?)
I wonder what your take is on these things?
Post a Comment
Please limit your comment to 300 words at the most!