Now honestly when I started writing this post I was going to embed the video for this episode of South Park. But I figure you might have kids in the room or be impressionable or maybe you don't know what kinds of things are usually on South Park. So don't go to that video if you're not prepared to sit through a crass cartoon for the six seconds that I'm going to use to make my point.
Nevertheless, somehow the irreverent and crass creators of South Park occasionally absolutely nail an issue.
In this episode the town of South Park is invaded by a hippie music festival. Some of the characters have become fed up with Corporations and Greed and such, and because the hippies say they are also fed up with it, the characters join in the festival. Yah! Fight the establishment!
Then they realize that they've just been playing music for nine days. One of the boys says, "when are we going to DO something about the corporations?" To which the hippies say, "he's right! play more music!" And when the hippies describe their vision of the perfect society, the boys realize that it's exactly like the current society.
Lately there have been a number of Occupy protests, most famously on Wall Street but even in my smallish town in Texas. None of them seem to possess anyone who can write, although they do have a heavy number of drum circles.
What disturbs me most about the Occupy movement--if you can apply the term "movement" to a group that mostly sits, messaging furiously on its phones--is not that they have no coherent core of ideas, no proposals for how to get their ideas, and no leaders/spokespersons. It's their scorn and derisiveness of people who suggest they should have these things.
Here's my take on the whole issue. Pretend I'm talking to an Occupant--who won't read this blog anyway, but whatever.
So you don't like corporations. Fine. But since my family gets fed because a corporation does business--this corporation also paves roads, builds houses, donates to charity, cleans up toxic waste, and gives its employees a benefits package that's nicer than they have to--you'd better explain to me what you're going to use to replace corporations in your perfect society.
It's all well and good to say that education and health care and enough to eat are human rights. But as the mom who has to figure out for my own family education and health care and enough to eat, I know from personal experience that these things will not occur without someone working for them. If I'm not to buy my food from a corporation--the grocery store who gets it from the industrial agriculture who grew it--then some of you will have to become full-time farmers who get dirty and sell me produce, for not very high wages. If I'm not to get my healthcare from a corporation, then some of you will have to become doctors who don't make good salaries--the old-timey docs who make house calls and sometimes get paid in produce. (Doctor was not considered a wealthy profession until the twentieth century.) And I already don't get my kids's education from a corporation (or the government), but I can tell you that means that I have to spend my days with my kids, educating them, instead of sitting in drum circles planning a revolution or being a herbal health care provider who practices without corporate or government support. Will MY voice be heard in your revolution? Or do I not count because I'm not there?
If your answer to the above is "the government should pay for it as a way to take care of its citizens", then I would ask who you think the government is going to tax if we get rid of all corporations. The farmer and the old-timey doc, who have very little actual cash? Me, staying home and generating no taxable income? You, in your drum circle? Where is the government going to get the money?
"Just stop all the wars and then you'll have plenty of money."
Actually, reviewing history, every revolution I can find has started wars, not stopped them. The Russian Revolution, for instance, stopped Russia's involvement in WWI (although you could debate that), but started a war between Red and White Russia that lasted for years longer and which killed MILLIONS OF PEOPLE. The French Revolution culminated in anarchy so pervasive and so deadly that people found Napoleon and his series of conquests appealing. The American Revolution caused a war that lasted four years. The revolution in China is so notorious I really shouldn't have to mention it.
(And no, I don't count what Gandhi did in India as a revolution. As someone whose name I can't remember right now pointed out, the only reason he succeeded was that he was dealing with the British, a basically democratic society. If he'd been dealing with Russia at the time, they would simply have shot him. End of peaceful resistance. Gandhi didn't stage a revolution, he used the pathways of a democracy to leverage power--in exactly the way the pathways of democracy are designed to be used. And you'll note that Gandhi had a clear idea of what he wanted and how to get it. It's called "policy".)
At any rate, the idea that forcing the government to turn their attention from foreign to civil war will save money shows that nobody reads history anymore.
But in reality, I don't think that any of this argument is necessary. Occupy isn't going to change anything, because they can't articulate what they want or how to get it. Eventually the frustration is either going to build or dissipate. We'll have violence or petering out, and it will end either in citizens getting disgusted with Occupy and locking them up or getting amused with Occupy and ignoring them in favor of the new Dancing With the Stars. Someone (maybe me!) is going to point out HOW HYPOCRITICAL IT IS TO LASH OUT AT CORPORATIONS WHILE TEXT MESSAGING ON A PHONE PLAN THAT YOU BOUGHT FROM VERIZON WITH YOUR CEO PARENTS' MONEY. The absurdity of it all will become apparent.
Or, you know, it will snow in New York and they will get cold and go home.
Either way, argument with these people is fruitless. They would, I suspect, if you forced them to read this, tell me I am a corporate tool, or brainwashed, or racist, or sexist, or a pig, or dumb, or something, anything to avoid actually engaging with my perfectly fair point that I want my kids to eat.
I suspect our most logical response might be to hire Eric Cartman.
Cheers,
Breanna
Nevertheless, somehow the irreverent and crass creators of South Park occasionally absolutely nail an issue.
In this episode the town of South Park is invaded by a hippie music festival. Some of the characters have become fed up with Corporations and Greed and such, and because the hippies say they are also fed up with it, the characters join in the festival. Yah! Fight the establishment!
Then they realize that they've just been playing music for nine days. One of the boys says, "when are we going to DO something about the corporations?" To which the hippies say, "he's right! play more music!" And when the hippies describe their vision of the perfect society, the boys realize that it's exactly like the current society.
Lately there have been a number of Occupy protests, most famously on Wall Street but even in my smallish town in Texas. None of them seem to possess anyone who can write, although they do have a heavy number of drum circles.
What disturbs me most about the Occupy movement--if you can apply the term "movement" to a group that mostly sits, messaging furiously on its phones--is not that they have no coherent core of ideas, no proposals for how to get their ideas, and no leaders/spokespersons. It's their scorn and derisiveness of people who suggest they should have these things.
Here's my take on the whole issue. Pretend I'm talking to an Occupant--who won't read this blog anyway, but whatever.
So you don't like corporations. Fine. But since my family gets fed because a corporation does business--this corporation also paves roads, builds houses, donates to charity, cleans up toxic waste, and gives its employees a benefits package that's nicer than they have to--you'd better explain to me what you're going to use to replace corporations in your perfect society.
It's all well and good to say that education and health care and enough to eat are human rights. But as the mom who has to figure out for my own family education and health care and enough to eat, I know from personal experience that these things will not occur without someone working for them. If I'm not to buy my food from a corporation--the grocery store who gets it from the industrial agriculture who grew it--then some of you will have to become full-time farmers who get dirty and sell me produce, for not very high wages. If I'm not to get my healthcare from a corporation, then some of you will have to become doctors who don't make good salaries--the old-timey docs who make house calls and sometimes get paid in produce. (Doctor was not considered a wealthy profession until the twentieth century.) And I already don't get my kids's education from a corporation (or the government), but I can tell you that means that I have to spend my days with my kids, educating them, instead of sitting in drum circles planning a revolution or being a herbal health care provider who practices without corporate or government support. Will MY voice be heard in your revolution? Or do I not count because I'm not there?
If your answer to the above is "the government should pay for it as a way to take care of its citizens", then I would ask who you think the government is going to tax if we get rid of all corporations. The farmer and the old-timey doc, who have very little actual cash? Me, staying home and generating no taxable income? You, in your drum circle? Where is the government going to get the money?
"Just stop all the wars and then you'll have plenty of money."
Actually, reviewing history, every revolution I can find has started wars, not stopped them. The Russian Revolution, for instance, stopped Russia's involvement in WWI (although you could debate that), but started a war between Red and White Russia that lasted for years longer and which killed MILLIONS OF PEOPLE. The French Revolution culminated in anarchy so pervasive and so deadly that people found Napoleon and his series of conquests appealing. The American Revolution caused a war that lasted four years. The revolution in China is so notorious I really shouldn't have to mention it.
(And no, I don't count what Gandhi did in India as a revolution. As someone whose name I can't remember right now pointed out, the only reason he succeeded was that he was dealing with the British, a basically democratic society. If he'd been dealing with Russia at the time, they would simply have shot him. End of peaceful resistance. Gandhi didn't stage a revolution, he used the pathways of a democracy to leverage power--in exactly the way the pathways of democracy are designed to be used. And you'll note that Gandhi had a clear idea of what he wanted and how to get it. It's called "policy".)
At any rate, the idea that forcing the government to turn their attention from foreign to civil war will save money shows that nobody reads history anymore.
But in reality, I don't think that any of this argument is necessary. Occupy isn't going to change anything, because they can't articulate what they want or how to get it. Eventually the frustration is either going to build or dissipate. We'll have violence or petering out, and it will end either in citizens getting disgusted with Occupy and locking them up or getting amused with Occupy and ignoring them in favor of the new Dancing With the Stars. Someone (maybe me!) is going to point out HOW HYPOCRITICAL IT IS TO LASH OUT AT CORPORATIONS WHILE TEXT MESSAGING ON A PHONE PLAN THAT YOU BOUGHT FROM VERIZON WITH YOUR CEO PARENTS' MONEY. The absurdity of it all will become apparent.
Or, you know, it will snow in New York and they will get cold and go home.
Either way, argument with these people is fruitless. They would, I suspect, if you forced them to read this, tell me I am a corporate tool, or brainwashed, or racist, or sexist, or a pig, or dumb, or something, anything to avoid actually engaging with my perfectly fair point that I want my kids to eat.
I suspect our most logical response might be to hire Eric Cartman.
Cheers,
Breanna
2 comments:
Hey Breanna, you probably don't remember me, but I am Brett Belleque's wife. You and Kindra used to play with my kids! Your Dad and Brett go way back! Linda Belleque clued me into your book (which I will read)and your blog, which I have read and love! You made me laugh. My daughter, Kristine has two kids under two and she is such a busy mom. I will tell her to read this too! thanks for your insight and writing!
Cindy Belleque
Post a Comment