Who's the bad guys?
6/3/12 01:07![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
allhatnocattle.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsIn the old days when we were young (most of us anyways) we used to watch Maple Leaf Wrestling or Stampede Wrestling or whenever wrestling your hometown had. We all knew who the bad guys were and we knew who the good guys were. Bad guys were Russian Bear, The Sheik, Kamakazi, or anyone dressed with a swastika. And bad guys cheated. They would stab opponents with pencils, spit fireballs, etc. And Good guys never cheated.
Today, many incarnations of wrestling later, the story lines in wrestling has blurred. Who the good guy is and who the bad guy is... is very unclear. Good guys are not so clearly good and nobody is really a true bad guy to boo for. Which is a sad reflection of modern society and especially the politics of politics. And speaking of which...
Why is everyone so familiar with American politics. It's marketed globally by news media companies as something that matters to everyone, even non-Americans, as perhaps there is some truth to this, but never the less it's manipulation. For non-Americans it doesn't really matter who wins the Republican nomination, or the 2012 Presidential election. It certainly doesn't matter enough to get a daily play-by-play run down of Super Tuesdays.
The Republican Primaries race is kind of like modern wrestling in the sense that none of the Republican candidates are truly good guys either. Maybe it was always this way, but in my youth I seem to recall knowing exactly who to cheer or boo for. The lines have blurred.
And it's not just in the USA, but here in Canada too. And it's the same when I read about Russia's re-election of Putin or any other foreign election. I mean I suffer from mixed feelings for all of them.
Like sports, quite often we choose a candidate (or a team) and support them regardless of everything logical. Doesn't matter if they are the best team with the best players with the best odds of winning the championship. All rationality has gone out the window for loyalty. So what I've concluded is that loyalty counts for a lot. How many in this community have actually switched team loyalty... or do so frequently?
Politically, most people have team loyalties. Although some starry eyed young liberals might grow more conservative as they age, I imagine they must struggle if their political beliefs have evolved enough to no longer reflect their long chosen loyalties. And so we have all important swing voters who can be swayed by either ideology.
I'm thinking about a friend of mine who is originally from Detroit. Like most Detroit natives he cheers for the hometown teams. He likes the Red Wings, Pistons, Tigers and of course the Lions... even though most of those teams have had some pretty lean years. His commitment is totally and utterly complete. And he's even backing his support for former Michigan state Governor Mitt Romney too, at least emotionally (or sentimentally) FWIW.
Especially in the fly-over states that don't have a hometown big league team to cheer for naturally. In Iowa, Montana, etc. liked Boston Celtics, New York Yankees and Dallas Cowboys from when they were 6yr.s old and still do today. But how are they going to vote?
One one hand you have the Tea Party against the Wall Street bail-outs. On the other hand we have the Occupy crowd against the Wall Street bail-outs as well. very few from any ideology wanted the gov't to pay-out and support the finance and industry big wigs. And somehow, even abroad, we were convinced that without Freddy, Fanny, Chevy and Dodge we would end up like Greece or even worse. So the financial and industry lobby groups got the bail-outs approved, not just in USA but globally.
You see in spite of our political team loyalties, we all share something. We knew the bail-outs were in their best interests, not ours directly or even indirectly. We had a chance to slow it down a notch and rethink the extent of capitalism which has grown extremely powerful in the hands of the very few.
But just like wrestling, we can't trust anyone any more. In fact it's awfully difficult to tell who's the good guys and who's the bad guys. The 1% are very rich and very powerful yet they keep the economy going and they keep us employed. Billionaires like Warren Buffet, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs are each practically given the status of sainthood! And our neighbourhoods seem safer with a Hell Angel biker in the hood. It's all so confusing!
I guess it's always been that way. JFKennedy provoked the Cuban Missile crisis with repeated assassination attempts on Castro and started the VietNam War. Nixon opened trade with China and ended the VietNam War. I guess bad people do good things and vice versa.
I guess it's just that I wish things were a little less complicated and a lot more clear cut and dry. Drugs might help, but anti-depressants are known to cause suicidal tendencies and weed is still illegal. I wish I could just back my political candidates and ideology with unquestioning devotion.
Ah-well. I guess that's why all of us anti-authoritarians eventually get diagnosed as mentally ill. Because when we can't trust good guys to be decent, bad guys to be omni-evil, and authorities to be authoritative... we're crazy.
Today, many incarnations of wrestling later, the story lines in wrestling has blurred. Who the good guy is and who the bad guy is... is very unclear. Good guys are not so clearly good and nobody is really a true bad guy to boo for. Which is a sad reflection of modern society and especially the politics of politics. And speaking of which...
Why is everyone so familiar with American politics. It's marketed globally by news media companies as something that matters to everyone, even non-Americans, as perhaps there is some truth to this, but never the less it's manipulation. For non-Americans it doesn't really matter who wins the Republican nomination, or the 2012 Presidential election. It certainly doesn't matter enough to get a daily play-by-play run down of Super Tuesdays.
The Republican Primaries race is kind of like modern wrestling in the sense that none of the Republican candidates are truly good guys either. Maybe it was always this way, but in my youth I seem to recall knowing exactly who to cheer or boo for. The lines have blurred.
And it's not just in the USA, but here in Canada too. And it's the same when I read about Russia's re-election of Putin or any other foreign election. I mean I suffer from mixed feelings for all of them.
Like sports, quite often we choose a candidate (or a team) and support them regardless of everything logical. Doesn't matter if they are the best team with the best players with the best odds of winning the championship. All rationality has gone out the window for loyalty. So what I've concluded is that loyalty counts for a lot. How many in this community have actually switched team loyalty... or do so frequently?
Politically, most people have team loyalties. Although some starry eyed young liberals might grow more conservative as they age, I imagine they must struggle if their political beliefs have evolved enough to no longer reflect their long chosen loyalties. And so we have all important swing voters who can be swayed by either ideology.
I'm thinking about a friend of mine who is originally from Detroit. Like most Detroit natives he cheers for the hometown teams. He likes the Red Wings, Pistons, Tigers and of course the Lions... even though most of those teams have had some pretty lean years. His commitment is totally and utterly complete. And he's even backing his support for former Michigan state Governor Mitt Romney too, at least emotionally (or sentimentally) FWIW.
Especially in the fly-over states that don't have a hometown big league team to cheer for naturally. In Iowa, Montana, etc. liked Boston Celtics, New York Yankees and Dallas Cowboys from when they were 6yr.s old and still do today. But how are they going to vote?
One one hand you have the Tea Party against the Wall Street bail-outs. On the other hand we have the Occupy crowd against the Wall Street bail-outs as well. very few from any ideology wanted the gov't to pay-out and support the finance and industry big wigs. And somehow, even abroad, we were convinced that without Freddy, Fanny, Chevy and Dodge we would end up like Greece or even worse. So the financial and industry lobby groups got the bail-outs approved, not just in USA but globally.
You see in spite of our political team loyalties, we all share something. We knew the bail-outs were in their best interests, not ours directly or even indirectly. We had a chance to slow it down a notch and rethink the extent of capitalism which has grown extremely powerful in the hands of the very few.
But just like wrestling, we can't trust anyone any more. In fact it's awfully difficult to tell who's the good guys and who's the bad guys. The 1% are very rich and very powerful yet they keep the economy going and they keep us employed. Billionaires like Warren Buffet, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs are each practically given the status of sainthood! And our neighbourhoods seem safer with a Hell Angel biker in the hood. It's all so confusing!
I guess it's always been that way. JFKennedy provoked the Cuban Missile crisis with repeated assassination attempts on Castro and started the VietNam War. Nixon opened trade with China and ended the VietNam War. I guess bad people do good things and vice versa.
I guess it's just that I wish things were a little less complicated and a lot more clear cut and dry. Drugs might help, but anti-depressants are known to cause suicidal tendencies and weed is still illegal. I wish I could just back my political candidates and ideology with unquestioning devotion.
Ah-well. I guess that's why all of us anti-authoritarians eventually get diagnosed as mentally ill. Because when we can't trust good guys to be decent, bad guys to be omni-evil, and authorities to be authoritative... we're crazy.
