Thursday, October 13, 2011

Can the “Greed” be Bullied out of Wall Street?

Years ago, when I quit my job to be a full time parent to my two sons, there was a short period of time when – much to my shame - I was mesmerized by the sleezy talk shows that dominated day-time TV.  One common theme was for women to come up on stage and tell the host and audience about their loser husbands or boyfriends who beat them up and/or cheated on them and/or were deadbeats.  Then they would bring the man of the hour out on stage and a familiar pattern would unfold for our entertainment.  The host and the audience would engage in a sort of mob-style intervention intended to fix the pathetic excuse for a man.  He would be interrogated, berated and ridiculed in an effort to make him see the evil in his ways.  Sometimes the woman would partake in the haranguing too.  Other times she would just sit quietly, the helpless victim.

I was initially transfixed by this recurring spectacle for the novelty of seeing people behave this way, coupled with their puzzling lack of shame about putting their wretched relationships on display for an audience.  Eventually, though, what interested me was the psychology of everyone involved.  Why, I wondered, were the host and audience focused on the behavior of the man when the reason for his behavior was plainly obvious:  he’s a jerk and she tolerates it.  The audience should have asked the woman, “What’s wrong with you that you accept this abuse?  How did you end up with this guy and why don’t you leave?”  But they rarely did.

This same peculiar mindset is currently on display among the “occupying” protestors in various cities across the nation.  Supposedly, this “movement” is largely about anger over corporate greed and the failures of capitalism.  If we accept – for the sake of argument - the premise that the problem with corporations is greed, then the question is:  Do protests and mob violence do anything to eradicate greed?  No.  Just as the badgering by the audience did nothing to change the character of the men on the talk shows, waving signs, shaking fists and blocking traffic won’t change the character or natural motivations of the people who run corporations, if indeed that is the problem. 

To the extent that corporations take advantage of people they do so for the same two reasons that the men on the talk shows take advantage of the women:  because they are free to pursue their own self interests and because some people seem to invite such treatment by virtue of their own choices in life.  Given the two parts of that equation, the liberal remedy is always to seek to limit people’s freedom to pursue their own self-interest through laws and regulations and, failing that, through intimidation.  That’s because the alternative of putting the onus on the individual to make choices that give them greater control over their lives is hard, and hard is a four-letter word to liberals.  Certainly it’s harder than the mindless task of marching around with signs and chanting incoherent slogans for a few days here and there (although I’m sure it’s not always easy to find the proper hippie attire).

Going back to the women on the talk shows for a minute, the reasons were often obvious as to why they settled for bums.  There was usually little evidence to show that they put much effort into making themselves attractive as mates in terms of appearance, education, personality or in other aspects of life.  That kind of self investment typically requires sacrifice, discipline, patience and perseverance that some aren’t willing to invest. 
Consequently their choices in men were limited to those who were willing to overlook their shortcomings, and these were typically men with shortcomings of their own.

Similarly, those who believe they are being taken advantage of by evil corporations are often people who haven’t invested the time, effort and other resources necessary to develop highly marketable skills and/or experience.  Their unwillingness to do the hard things and make personal sacrifices to increase the value of their labor makes them their own worst enemy.

In contrast to the liberals' answer to corporate greed, real conservatives understand that the freedom to pursue and strive to maximize one’s own self-interest is a necessary component of a successful society, and the attempts to quash that natural instinct are akin to killing the proverbial golden goose.  They see the big picture, while liberals are forever blinded by the self-made bubbles they live in. 

I understand there’s a whole lot more at play here in terms of what’s motivating the various factions of the OWS clowns, but this is a blog, not a book.  I’m simply addressing one of their many phony grievances.

17 comments:

  1. "...and hard is a four-letter word to liberals."

    I nominate this point as idea of the year, maybe decade! Getting others to reduce their profit level is indeed much easier than doing the work necessary to lift one's self up and move on in life. Greed needs victims and as long as there are so many so willing to act the part of the victim, there will be those who take advantage. Starving the greed beast requires hard work and dogged determination.

    Well that's my take on your post, CW. Excellent read and relating it to the daytime shows is brilliant.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you, Mrs. AL.

    I always appreciate your input.

    ReplyDelete
  3. CW,
    That was a wonderful essay. I doubt few understand why they are there beyond the party aspect of it all.

    In the 70's I attended a few ant-war protests not because I was against the war but to meet women. Remember those bra-burning gals? Not altogether bad from a male point of view, especially when I was 18 years old. That said, it was evident then that they didn't have a clue as to who, what, where or why, I submit that it is the same today.

    Back then they spoke of revolution in a peaceful sort of way for the most part (except the Weather Underground and the Black Panthers), today they are talking about violent revolution and are embracing communism. Big difference.

    I read today that some jackass wants a Kent State event to unfold to underscore the movement's purpose. That's nuts by any measure. Naturally, the jackass wasn't offering himself to be shot.

    Special interest groups in this country, from both left and right, pull the strings behind the scenes. This is where the focus of the protestors should be instead of the evil corporations which are an easy target.

    The one message with all of this is: people are pissed and it's not just us conservatives.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Very well done. Your framing in the context of talk shows draws the reader into your argument in such a way that he/she finds himself/herself agreeing with you before they realize they're being mugged by a gang of facts! Well done indeed!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thank you, Hardnox.

    I had a chuckle about your story of going to anti-war protests to meet women. It’s a wonder I didn’t see you on one of those talk shows! (Just kidding!).

    As you may have gathered, I don’t have much respect for the OWS crowd. Liberals are always angry about the wrong things and they are always pushing for the wrong answers.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thank you, Interface...

    I must confess there is a method to my madness.

    ReplyDelete
  7. CW,
    It wasn't me... I didn't knock anyone up. I have both Jerry Springer and Morri Povitch that will vouch for me... honest!

    Ditto here, those asshats need to stop wasting their parent's money and get back to class. Since my early teens I have noticed that the liberals are brain dead. In 40 years they have yet to come up with anything useful. Think about it. Nothing! Not one friggin thing that hasn't turned into crap one way or the other.

    ReplyDelete
  8. CW, good post. I wonder what the media attention would have been if Tea Partiers were behaving like this. I have seen signs (posting some grievences) saying "free education" and "free healthcare". Do people understand that nothing is "free". Unbelievable!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hi Patrick,

    "Unbelievable" sums it all up pretty well!

    ReplyDelete
  10. In 1792 (in 2000 dollars)the federal government spent about $30 per American per year. That had quadrupled by the 1910s at $129 per per. The started the progressive era (or error) with Woodrow Wilson. In 2004 it was $7,100 per per, 55 times 90 years earlier (still talkng in 2000 dollars, so controlling for inflation and comparing apples with apples). Total (federal, state, and local) government spending per per in 1948 were $2,350 and grew to $12,150 in 2004.

    The behemoth that government (especially federal) had become was by 2004 already unsustainable. What has happened in the past three years has but continued the train on the same rail toward the cliff, but from a speed of 60 mph taken it to 210 mph.

    Now, if you're a college kid, you see no future. If you're a college grad, you see no future and no way to ever pay off the student loans to pay for you women's studies or urban studies or GLBT studies dumb-mass degree. Now if you're a retiree with a 401k now a 201k, you see no future. And they're all right.

    The current behemoth that is government isn't just unsustainable; at 210 mph, it's not even stoppable.

    Who's to blame? You're right, CW. We're the woman who was addicted to him.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Gov’t is really a reflection of the power struggle that exists within society. It provides a means by which the stronger factions can control the rest while bypassing the more traditional tactics of war, such as physical combat. If gov’t is truly unstoppable, that can only mean that we are the weaker party in this conflict. That could be that case, but I’m not ready to concede defeat just yet.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Just to note, CW, that, though a skosh short on tanks and fighter jets, the largest standing army on Planet Earth, albeit seasonal, is American deer hunters.

    ReplyDelete
  13. There are times I feel like a complete ass because as a student I missed all the student protests and uprisings. Not only did I miss them, I didn't even know about them.

    And here is why. I was going to college in Nursing. I arose at 5am to eat, arriving at my first class at 6am.

    Our "day" classes ended at noon, we ate lunch and then worked on the floor of the hospital for another 3 hours at least. After all it was a teaching hospital.

    After that we returned to class up until 6pm, dinner time.

    After dinner, we all hit our books every night, wrote our case studies on the patients under our care during the day and hopefully, if you were lucky, rolled into bed around 2am.

    Ah, those 3 hours of sleep were heaven.

    TV? We never watched one moment of it. On the weekends we worked full time in the hospital. Then we hit our books as there were exams constantly and on some very difficult subjects I might add.

    So later after all the learning, the working in the hospital tending to terminally ill cancer patients, other terminally ill patients, post surgical patients, children with all kinds of diseases from which they would never recover, old people dying. I could go on but I think one can get the picture.
    We simply had no time for the outer world and what the hell was "importantly" going on like student protests and Woodstock.

    So I feel like a dummy having missed it. Now, retired, I can watch it if I want which I don't. I don't care about anyone standing on Wall Street or wherever they are camped out. They look like stupid, greedy, spoiled, unmitigated pan handlers to me.

    All I can think is "get off your asses and do something, anything that would be in the least bit productive instead of whining.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Pepperhawk:

    >>”All I can think is "get off your asses and do something, anything that would be in the least bit productive instead of whining.”

    Well said. I agree.

    What could these folks accomplish towards their dream of “economic equality” if they would simply spend their energy on actually producing something that would provide value to someone else? But that’s not really their point, is it? The protests are ultimately about two things: (1) Taking the wealth of others by force and intimidation; and (2) gratifying the egos of the protestors who wish to be congratulated for “making a difference.” The lasting damage they do to us as a nation is irrelevant to them.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Ok, it's been almost 2 full weeks ... when can we expect another post, CW [imagine smiley face here]

    ReplyDelete
  16. I've been busy arguing with Curt the leftist, Mrs. AL. I'll get right on it!

    ReplyDelete
  17. I will check out your debate with Curt, though I suspect I am going to find those tedious troll things there and have to wade through garbage -- hehe

    ReplyDelete