Bad role models

I just opened a book and was hit with a passage that set me on my heels. The author reverses cause and effect, and sheds light on our society:

The real derangement is in the failures of our ideas and the success of our sociopathic society in undermining the very main gauge for critiquing it. In this book, I develop a concept of a sociopathic society that is structural, rooted in the political and economic system rather than in psychiatry. It shows that sociopathic individuals in the United States are often successful and well-adjusted, most of them sane and socially integrated. They are more likely to be conforming to the values and rules of conduct in our society than violating them. It is the rules and values that are at least metaphorically “sick.”

The book is Sociopathic Society: A People’s Sociology of the United States, by Charles Derber. In have gotten through the intro and am now on page two. Right away I see the author to be a bit deluded in that he unquestioningly buys into the nonsense of major violent events of our time, meaning he’s walking an unobservant and conformist walk. But it appears he has much to offer, so I’ll set that aside.

I do see his point: What is Milton Friedman saying, what does “Reaganomics” mean, if not that it is OK to be greedy, to crush other people in the marketplace? William Skink just wrote about this phenomenon wherein “Uber” is destroying business models and lives in the name of market efficiency. It’s a decidedly reckless venture that could cost the economic well-being of tens of thousands of people. It could well be destructive of our existing order without improvement, and all seen as normal. We need more caution, more genuine conservatives among us to put the kibosh on such careless people.

I read a delightful book a while back by John Cleese, So Anyway, which is just a ramble about his life. I was struck by his early impressions coming to the United States from England. Here it was seen as normal and admirable to be engaged in any slip-shoddy activity if it brought good economic results. Over there, he said (and at least in his youth), it was rare and not particularly admired to strike out on a business career as an “entrepreneur.” The overt pursuit of money for its own sake was not socially accepted.

Successful people often attain wealth as a side effect to other admirable and useful talents, music or inventions, for example. They are not after money for its own sake, and don’t behave like the people giving us Uber, which appears to be nothing more than a rent seeking enterprise.

In other words, all of these people looking to make a fast and big buck are not useful or productive citizens, and ought not to be rewarded or admired. Bill Gates, for instance, strikes me as autistic, lucky, and not terribly gifted in any sense other than being cold and ruthless and in the right place at the right time. That is true of most of our executive class, seeking only quarterly results at any cost. Waltons, Kochs and Kennedy’s alike are lucky aristocrats, never having earned a dime. Bushes and Clintons are parasites, devoid of conscience and willing to do anything to be successful.

Such people are always with us. We honor them. That is the problem.

About Mark Tokarski

Just a man who likes to read, argue, and occasionally be surprised.
This entry was posted in American wilderness. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Bad role models

  1. steve kelly says:

    Corporations are not human and fundamentally amoral. Profit-making is not a “social good.” Unless forced outside strict profit-making activities, a corporation is naturally greedy and selfish. Government has been transformed, “corporatized,” leaving no effective check on greed and selfishness. For me, 1980 was the tipping point. We The People are now prey in a predatory system with no organized defense. With no constraints, oversight, accountability or enforcement over merged corporate and government power we stand to lose everything previous generations invested in and fought to protect.

    Like

  2. steve kelly says:

    “Graeme MacQueen’s 2014 book, The 2001 Anthrax Deception: The Case for a Domestic Conspiracy, has been vindicated by the head of the FBI’s Anthrax Investigation.” -Paul Craig Roberts

    “MacQueen’s conclusion stands vindicated by Richard Lambert, the agent in charge of the FBI anthrax investigation who has turned whistleblower.” http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/04/head-fbis-anthrax-investigation-calls-b-s.html

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article41591.htm

    Curiouser and curiouser…..

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s