The Trouble with Politics

© by Mark Dempsey

To make a point in a political conversation, I reported that publicly-owned SMUD supplies electrons more cheaply than privately-owned PG&E, so [in some cases] “socialism is cheaper and works better.” The reactions, wide-eyed as they were, quickly told me the politically-interested people I addressed weren’t ready to hear that.

Incidentally, SMUD is an estimated 35% cheaper than privately-owned PG&E, and PG&E shorted maintenance often enough in pursuit of profit that their management potentially faced negligent homicide charges for the damage that lack of maintenance did. Publicly-owned SMUD is not only cheaper, it works better.

A retired gentleman who heard my remark told me “If we do what you say, my 401K would be damaged.” I had to gently remind him that the stock market was risky regardless. It declined in 2007-8 without any action by me.

Later, I realized the retired gentleman had mistaken symbols of wealth for actual wealth. It won’t matter how big is his stack of stock certificates or dollars if there’s nothing to buy. If Wall Street burns up the planet to make bigger profits, then ultimately those stacks will come to nothing.

There are various names for this condition. “Midas disease” is one. Alfred North Whitehead calls it “the fallacy of misplaced concreteness” – mistaking a symbol for the real thing. One example: going to a restaurant, then devouring the paper menu rather than the food. Even the Bible’s commandment not to worship idols is a reminder to give devotion to the genuine article rather than a symbol for it.

Nevertheless, convincing people to reflect on facts rather than some mythical thinking they have adopted remains a daunting task. Abandoning willful ignorance is not something people generally embrace–and unfortunately, I’m no exception.

So…is there some dependable way to deal with those “inconvenient truths” without throwing conversational hand grenades? I’d like to think that, metaphorically speaking, gentle stretching, like yoga, would be the best approach. The politically savvy say to start from a mutual agreement and work out from there. But I’m not always that skilled, and I can’t say I’m charismatic or even gentle and patient enough always to be convincing. I suppose it's better to know my own limitations, even if it is frustrating.