E Pluribus Unum

by shep

Naomi Klein’s Shock Doctrine theory is fine as far as it goes. And the video is a powerful way of illustrating the story of the Republican betrayal of America.

But change, even fairly radical change for the worse, doesn’t always require “shock” and it can be implemented gradually, almost imperceptibly. Sometimes it even works better that way (the frog going from enjoying his warm bath to boiled appetizer, rather than jumping out of the pot).

There was no particular shock that led to the Robber Baron era and the incremental codification of corporations as “persons” (a radical constitutional subversion) and its fundamental effects on modern society over time. There was mighty hardship and insecurity, which made it easy because people were too busy to do much but focus on simple survival.

Which brings up an interesting flip side to negative motivation: isn’t our basic problem now that we are really just too fat and happy? Even though the shock of 9/11 has (mostly) worn off aren’t we too frightened of losing the relative comfort and pleasures of our middle-class lifestyles to want to seriously rock the boat? I think that is actually one of the things that motivate the hyper-rich (including our media elites), especially those who have at one time struggled, to so callously trample on everything outside their tribe merely to increase their social status and already obscene wealth: they are driven by the deep-seated fear of losing their comfort and station (once you go Baccarat, you never want to go back).

(On a possibly more positive note, isn’t our current fear for our children’s future also a powerful motivating force?)

I say it’s more broadly about leadership and the unconscious need that many have to follow. FDR, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Ford, Carter, Clinton, with all of their faults, were essentially good leaders. They (mostly) called us to our better angels, the people followed and we progressed. After all, responding to the mighty and terrifying “shocks” of the Great Depression and WWII, FDR, Truman and Eisenhower led us to create perhaps the greatest society of all time.

At the same time, Stalin and Hitler and Mussolini and Hirohito pointed the opposite way and their followers had experienced no more “shock” than the many who rejected the call to inhumanity.

Did the election of 1979 prove that “malaise” works as well as shock?

And in 2000, we were living through a decade of relative peace and incredible prosperity yet we let the Republicans steal a presidential election right before our eyes.

No, bad leaders don’t need shock us to change us for the worse. It’s just one of many human vulnerabilities, like deep-seated fear, hatred, insecurity, pride or greed, that makes it easier. If you think about it, for at least the past forty years, Republicans have used all of them to try to change us. The good news is that not everyone is susceptible to appeals to those base drives and good leaders can point the rest of us toward something worth following.