|
Optimism has been given a bad name. By pessimists. Plus, boatloads of philosophers and writers who have asserted that not being depressed is a sign of inattention or raging stupidity. How many writers have made it big because they are happy, internally satisfied and looking forward to the coming years or even the next day? Here's what Sammy Beckett had to say:
“No, I regret nothing, all I regret is having been born, dying is such a long tiresome business I always found.”
For that, you get a Nobel prize in literature.
The easiest position to take about the future of human beings is pessimism. In the short term, almost everything gets worse, but with a longer view, they do get better. Who would imagined that America’s crime rate would move steadily downward over a couple of decades after the murder and mess of the 1980s? When HIV-AIDS came along in the same time period, who would have thought, one, that infection rates would one day decrease or slow down and, two, a medical method of controlling AIDS would be widely available?
In politics and public debate, of course, it is even easier to take the dim view. What we have seen over the last fifty years (I know you are dying to find out) is massive push back against the modern world. First, comes the critique, then comes the anger and rage, followed by energized supporters who join the ranks of those who would like to move back to 1810 or so. In America, it takes the form of most of the Republican party, the far right, the Tea Pot Party and even those who simply choose not to vote. In the middle east, fundamentalist Islam has done the trick. In essence, it all pours forth from the same fountain: dissatisfaction with the way things are going, changing and changing too fast for comfort.
Here's the deal: none of the forces of reaction are going to win over the long term. The modern world is here, complicated, complex, irritating and disorienting, but it ain't going away. Sorry, guys.
We have a very big country in the United States and politicians make their way, and their fortunes, by opposing the diversity that implies. The only way to change that is to break up into state or regional configurations. Anyone for that? Okay, then shut up, please, and make peace with your neighbors, even if they live two thousand miles away. Find a way to make peace. Islam is not going to win with bombs or other terror. The forces of reaction are not going to win indefinitely here either. That could be one reason that the Republican far right shows such signs of desperation these days. Bear in mind, there is another position besides left or right. It is called FORWARD.
The middle east is clawing its way out from under the thumbs of autocrats and diplomats and a moneyed ruling class that doesn't want to share. The easy part is getting the government out of their hands. Who is going to take the money? As long as wealth is concentrated among so few, true, broad based prosperity is nearly impossible.
Wealth concentration is a major issue here, too. If the Republicans get their way and increase disparities, then our own prosperity with continue sinking until it reaches a crisis point and forces a popular response. I'm not worried. I believe democracy will find and implement solutions long before that point.
The world is a rough place and there is no expectation that this will change for the better. Those who are unwilling to fight for justice, for democracy and basic fairness generally get mowed down in heavy traffic. Let the awakening of consciousness we have seen in the middle east continue and spread. It is a cliche, but nonetheless true: The people united can never be defeated. The same can be said for the forces of change and modernism
Of course, the major question about change, especially technological, is whether we will master it or it will master us. The answer is yes. Some of both, that is. When I walk around in public settings these days and I see half the heads bent over looking down at smartphones and typing out messages, I have little question that we are serving technology rather than the other way around. Why, oh why, does one have to be constantly in touch with other people, constantly getting messages and responding? What are you, a radio station?. When I was nine or ten years old, the idea of two way communication seemed really great. It wasn’t the concept of actually saying something, it was the idea that you could do it. Maybe that’s part of what is behind the texting craze.
In time, I think we will get a handle on technological changes and make it do more of what we want and need rather than just use it because it is there. Whatever is merely a fad now will fade away in favor of valuable uses, but it will take time. Some people take a drink of alcohol and then never stop. Some people take two drinks, enjoy them and never return or at least don’t return regularly.
Yes, I am optimistic, because I believe people have the ability and the power to work things out over time. In our great democratic experiment here in the U.S., we face many problems, too, but I have considerable faith that we can pull through.
Doug Terry, 3.3.11
|
|
