Extreme pessimism and negative certainty as defensive mechanisms

[Silent3]

There seems to be a lot of that going around here lately.

Which is not to say some of it might not turn turn out to be justified or true. But still, I wonder what it gains people.

If the huge mass of rage and doom here felt like it was brewing into a movement that could spark positive change, it would be one thing. But it doesn't feel like that to me.

It feels more like, "I'M NOT GOING TO LET MYSELF BE FOOLED! At the first hint of bad news, I want to be first to claim that the hint isn't just a hint, it's the rock-solid proof of the worst that I had imagined is true, and IT'S JUST THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG!"

"I CAN'T BE NAIVE! I WON'T GIVE THE BASTARDS THE CHANCE TO PULL THE WOOL OVER MY EYES! I'm going show 'em I'm onto their tricks! If I'm going to live in a hopeless hell of the weak crushed by the powerful, then DAMN IT! I"M GOING TO HAVE THE SATISFACTION OF HAVING PREDICTED IT!"

[BillyJack]

1. Yep!

"I CAN'T BE NAIVE! I WON'T GIVE THE BASTARDS THE CHANCE TO PULL THE WOOL OVER MY EYES! I'm going show 'em I'm onto their tricks! If I'm going to live in a hopeless hell of the weak crushed by the powerful, then DAMN IT! I"M GOING TO HAVE THE SATISFACTION OF HAVING PREDICTED IT!"

....so now what do you suggest *we* do?

[Silent3]

2. I'd just like to get people to stop and think a bit about what they post...

...instead of just venting emotionally.

Then again, I'm sure that a lot of the extreme pessimism and negativity comes from people who are quite certain that they are thinking, thinking quite thoroughly and deeply and much more clearly than anyone who dares to feel a ray of hope, entertain a positive thought, or dial back their anxiety to something below 11.

[JDPriestly]

5. Lots of the extreme pessimism comes from people who

are smart, read history and have been watching the Obama administration and its reneging on promise after promise for quite some time.

My trust in Obama and all his hope is just about nil at this time.

He just does not seem to have a moral compass at all. He just seems to want to be liked by the Republicans and independent voters.

If he thinks he can get by without my vote, maybe I should not vote for him. Why should I vote for someone who shows over and over that he does not represent me?

People are pessimistic because the grounds for pessimism are overwhelming.

[21st Century FDR]

3. If you don't understand why people are "pessimistic"

What country have you been living in since December 12, 2000?

[MADem]

4. Some people really do relish a half empty glass.

Their personal lives suck, so they like to beat up strangers on the internet for not being quite as miserable as they are. They also like to imbue politicians with supernatural qualities--pure goodness and light, or thorough mendacity and evil. None of the politicians are, in actual fact, all good or all bad. They're either leftish, or right-ish, for the most part, and they have massive egos (some manage to hide this better than others). However, that doesn't stop people from being really pissed off when they discover that their "favorite" politician, the one they've imagined has all these wonderful qualities, isn't doing what they want him/her to do--and then they get hurt and betrayed, much like a jilted lover.

Often, the angry people of which you speak aren't really lashing out in response to any political issue. That's just the excuse for their conduct. This DU is the boxing ring, the forum where they battle out their frustrations. It's like getting crapped on by your boss, and coming home and kicking the dog...only they do it to people; strangers, really, that they don't even know. Don't agree with me? Well, EFF YOU! They get rude and short with people on the internet, and they're probably Milquetoasts who wouldn't say "Shit" if they had a mouth full of it in person.

For a second or ten, the bloviating and anger empowers them-- it makes 'em feel like Big Shots. Then the misery returns.

Life is way too short to be that attitudinal. All you can do is the best you can do. Gripe to your congressman or senator, help out at the soup kitchen, take your dog to the old folks' home for a nice visit. Try to be a decent citizen.

Get out of your own head, that's the best bet.

[JDPriestly]

6. I take it you are either not retired or independently wealthy.

Retired people who rely on Social Security have good reason to be pessimistic right now.

Obama has already declared a holiday for the payment of the employer's share of the FICA (Social Security) taxes. That is intended to weaken the system, not strengthen it. Obama has doublecrossed seniors and baby-boomers.

It isn't healthy to go into denial about it.

[Silent3]

14. That's the kind of unfounded defensive certainty I'm talking about

Obama has already declared a holiday for the payment of the employer's share of the FICA (Social Security) taxes. That is intended to weaken the system, not strengthen it.

While it's definitely possible that the end result of the FICA cut will be a weakening of Social Security, and even somewhat possible that it was done as an intentional plan to accomplish just that, there really is no basis for declaring certainty on that point.

What I see here is the fear of being duped I was talking about -- trying to "get ahead of the game" somehow, to show the world you "aren't buying it", by knowing that it's definitely the evil scheme you think it is.

[Fire1]

63. A nice way of saying "speculation and conjecture." n/t

[me b zola]

7. Irony

Your post + your sigline

[Posteritatis]

8. Martyred outrage actually sorta feels good to a lot of people

If you're in that state, the world's wrong and you're right and that's just the way it is dammit insert angry fist shaking here. Heaven knows it's also the easiest way to react a lot of the time, since you don't have to invest much in any particular thing.

It's not really a "lately" thing either as much as an absolute constant around here. I've been lectured a few times here about how ultra-pessimistic despair is the only correct response for a decent person in this day and age; fuck that.

The fact that most people sharing that mindset will look at the above paragraph and decide I simply must be some wide-eyed Pollyana-ish absolute optimist is either a whole separate problem or a big part of the one you're talking about; I haven't decided yet.

[Bluerthanblue]

22. well said-

I agree.

Sometimes it's louder and more intense than others, but not new imo.

[Fumesucker]

9. Beyond a certain point it's emotionally easier not to have hope.

When you meet with dissapointment and dashing of your hopes time after time after time from forces that are basically completely out of your control, for some people it's just emotionally easier to give up hope than to continue having your hopes dashed.

A low flatline emotional state is easier for some people than a roller coaster of high hopes followed by crashing despair.

Yeah, it's a defense mechanism. On the other hand we do have a lot of people on here who are very well versed in history, far, far better than the average American, and the historical parallels to the current situation are impossible to avoid for a lot of us.

[Silent3]

13. I have a lot of worries myself

I consider it to be a very real possibility, for example, that the debt ceiling problem won't be solved and we'll plunge into an even deeper crisis than in 2008.

What I don't see is a good reason TO BE CERTAIN that will happen, I don't see a good reason to fervently speculate (where "speculate" really means "insist" or "declare" or "accuse") about supposed machinations and conspiracies behind the problems we face, I don't see a good reason to act like I'm certain of the motives of many of the players in the political and financial games behind the problems the world faces.

While I certainly understand the idea of trying to maintain a "low flatline emotional state (which) is easier for some people than a roller coaster of high hopes followed by crashing despair" (a state I have often put myself into), what I'm talking about goes beyond that. It's not a "low flatline emotional state", but a frenzy of pessimism, a desire to guess at every possible nefarious motive and cynical political game, then act like you have (if not openly declare that you have) certainty on all of your guesses, as if somehow this is a "win" of some sort, a way you can beat the evil bastards by showin' 'em you're onto their game, and a way to win the applause of your fellow extreme pessimists while one basks in the camaraderie of doom.

[Fumesucker]

33. When you have reached the point of giving up hope..

Those who try to give you hope become an irritant, an enemy you can defeat.

There is a certain apparent strong Obama supporter who has become infamous for posting an OP consisting of nothing but an often provocative title.

Conversely there is someone else who evidently posts nothing but articles that make Obama look bad.

Which one is more irritating or more wrong?

It's like the theist-atheist battles, a lot of folks distort the other side when it becomes a battle of ideologies (or the lack thereof ;) )

[JDPriestly]

47. Have you read the history, the economic history, of France

prior to the French Revolution. You might want to inform yourself.

The French aristocracy amused itself by gambling. The King, upon the advice of aides, provided financial support for our revolution (against their enemy, the British) and otherwise spent money cavalierly. Of course, France had what we would call a deficit. And to cover the deficit, it imposed taxes on the poor and on the emerging middle class of tradesmen.

It is most appropriate at this time of year to remember what happened next. July 14, Bastille Day. At least that is the symbol for what happened next.

The Republicans and Obama are playing with fire. They have relentlessly meddled in foreign affairs -- apparently in hopes of controlling Mideast oil and keeping what they perceived as potential enemies very busy.

Suddenly, the Republicans and Obama have realized that our country has a huge deficit. Surprise????

And they want to make the poor (the equivalent of the French peasants) and the middle class pay for it.

They need to read up on their history.

[lillypaddle]

10. You said it

It's gotten almost unbearable around here. I'm too embarrassed to recommend DU to anyone these days.

[Pholus]

11. Whatever works, right? I was enthusiastic the first couple of times...

But then I saw a pattern. And the pattern has not broken yet.

[Silent3]

12. To respond to several of the posts here at once...

I never said that some pessimism wasn't justified. Perhaps even a lot. I've got a lot of pessimism myself. But the pessimism here on DU comes across as a game of one-upsmanship, with people competing to show just how pessimistic they can be, and with the greatest pessimism getting the loudest "K&R!!!!" applause.

Another big component of what I'm talking about here is the explanations people come up with, often delivered with a tone of great certainty, for all that's wrong in the country and in the world (and there's definitely a lot that's wrong). These explanations are often hugely speculative, regardless of how well-informed one is, made by people who sound very confident that they "see the patterns" behind the facts.

One example that comes to mind is when the huge Gulf oil spill happened. The reality of that disaster was more than bad enough. But we had people here predicting the death of all of the oceans from this one incident, soon to be followed by the death of the whole planet. As icing on that doom cake, plenty were happy to speculate that it wasn't merely the folly of the Rich and Powerful, their greed gone awry that was about to kill the planet, but that the Rich and Powerful had planned to kill the planet all along, because of course, some how, they had engineered and orchestrated everything to make themselves even richer and more powerful that way.

One thing the kind of pessimism I'm talking about simply won't tolerate is any attempt to moderate it. In the black-and-white thinking of many of these X-TREME pessimists (spelled "X-TREME" to invoke the idea of a competitive sport) anyone who attempts to moderate the pessimism "obviously" has to be their complete diametric opposite, a paid stooge of the Powers that Be, or an utterly naive fool who knows nothing, sees nothing, who is "obviously" saying, "Don't worry! Be happy!" regardless of whatever words they actually type or speak.

[StarburstClock]

15. Awl, too ugly for your pretty widdle mind?

Says a lot.

[Silent3]

21. What exactly did I say was "too ugly"?

If person A says the chance of doom is 90%, B says 99%, and C says 99.9%, is C always right? Are A and B always naive fools who can't take the "ugliness"?

When person D comes along who is 99.99% certain of doom, has he got 'em all beat?

[Pale Blue Dot]

16. What it gains people? What it gains people?

If people had listen to us "defensive pessimists" 2 years ago when we were telling you that nothing was fixed and that the wrong people were making the wrong decisions, something could have stopped this. Instead, people laughed at us, called us names, told us to shut up, and then continued on the same disastrous path.

STILL, nothing's been fixed. I'll say it again: things are about to get even worse unless we change course immeadiately. Will you listen now? Or will you continue to call me names and pretend that everything's ok?

[Silent3]

19. Who said "everything's OK"?

That's exactly my point. There's no in-between for you.

[lumberjack_jeff]

17. And yet the the alternative is to live in the smallest circle in your signature graphic.

You're operating under a false assumption; That those who are expressing extreme pessimism lately are doing so chronically. They are not. They are doing so as a reaction to a world situation which now justifies negative certainty.

[inna]

48. Exactly. Thank you. nt

[Fearless]

18. Sounds like you're suffering from some level of self-deception. n/t

[Silent3]

23. So, if one doesn't automatically accept the worst predictions...

...of doom and gloom out there (and there's always a prediction even worse than the last one), that person must be "self deceived"?

[Fearless]

24. And if they turn out right they must be lucky?

Edit to add: In terms of SS et. al. I'd rather air on the side of caution and expect the worst. I would be ECSTATIC to be wrong about this.

[Silent3]

27. Most people, myself included, are in large part lucky...

...when their predictions come true. Most real-world problems defy the possibility to obtain great certainty. It definitely happens that people turn out to be right for the wrong reasons, just as they also turn out to be wrong even when they've made the best possible judgement with the best data.

[Fearless]

28. It all depends on opinion on what is right and what is wrong.

We clearly have differing opinions. Such is life.

[Silent3]

32. Which is exactly why opinions should be tempered by...

...an acknowledgement of doubt and complexity, rather than being delivered with flaming certainty not only of doom, but the imagined motivations and machinations behind that imagined doom.

[Bluenorthwest]

36. That is ironic, because the bulk of your OP is your imagined

motivations of those you characterize negatively. The majority of your OP is about 'what it feels more like' to you, then a bunch of things you imagine others are thinking. I'm an optimist by nature, but that is not what you are calling for, nor are you calling for balance, you are doing in your OP exactly what you are criticizing here, coming on with flaming certainty and also the imagined motivations of others. To be blunt, it is quiet the display to behold.

[JDPriestly]

49. What qualifies you to assess the situation with any accuracy?

Are you a historian, an economist, a lawyer, a doctor? What in the world makes you think you are such an expert that you can judge how other people should react to the dismal job that Obama is doing as president.

I rejoiced like every other Democrat when Obama took office. I shared the hope of all DUers.

I am on Social Security. It is hard enough to deal with the first signs of the developing infirmities and weaknesses of age. But to have rich guys like Obama and Boehner telling me, now that I am rely on Social Security and Medicare, as my primary income, that my benefits cannot be increased and my medical costs cannot be covered to keep up with inflation because Bush's frivolous wars and the White House parties have to be paid for makes me very pessimistic.

Sorry, but I am very human.

And don't talk about my grandchildren. My Social Security is not what will deprive them of a future. "Free trade," having to compete with the impoverished workers of the world, outsourcing and the greed of the trust fund bums will cost them their futures, not my Social Security and Medicare. I paid for what I get from Social Security and Medicare and for the COLAs to which I am entitled.

If you are worried about deficits, end the Bush tax cuts. Return to the tax schedule that we had under Clinton. We were starting to balance our budgets under that schedule. The Bush tax cuts are the problem, not Social Security and Medicare.

And if you think that raising taxes on the rich will increase unemployment, show me the numbers. Show me any statistics that actually prove that raising taxes on the rich increases unemployment.

If you look at our economic history, you realize that we were most prosperous when a) we taxed the rich at very high rates and b) we placed tariffs on imports.

We need to return to the tax schedule and import taxes that insured our prosperity. Cutting Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid and other important government programs will only make people more pessimistic -- and most of us much poorer.

[Silent3]

57. So predictions of complete doom are the safest bet...

...when you aren't an expert? Or somehow I need to be a "a historian, an economist, a lawyer, a doctor" in order to be qualified to detect overreaction?

What's odd is that I don't disagree with much of anything you say in the rest of your post, so the only thing I can figure out is that you're making the same silly mistake that seems irresistible to so many people:

A: "The sky is falling!"
B: "Well, things are bad, but you do know the sky can't actually fall, don't you?"
A: "What make you think everything's OK! Who are you to judge!"

There's not one word in any of my posts that suggests that I don't understand, or wouldn't agree with, for example: "If you look at our economic history, you realize that we were most prosperous when a) we taxed the rich at very high rates and b) we placed tariffs on imports."

Not only to you tell me the above as if I couldn't possibly know that, but you say it as if I've somehow come out and disagreed with what you've said.

Why react that way? Where the hell does that reaction come from based on my own words?

[JDPriestly]

62. I was very optimistic on inauguration day.

I have been disappointed over and over again. Out here in real America, we are paying the price for Obama's repeated errors.

I fear for myself. I fear for my children. I do not trust our leaders to do what is best for us, for our environment or for our economy. They are floundering and do not have a clue as to what they are doing.

So that is why I am pessimistic.

I think that Obama is very hesitant and pessimistic also. He is confused. He does not understand economics. He apparently is no mathematician. His talent is in understanding what motivates people, but not how money works.

Obama's picks for economic advisers were just the worst possible under the circumstances. They were all people more concerned about Wall Street and the bankers and the stability in the financial sector than they were about the real economy -- the economy of manufacturing and industrial strength.

Obama is the product of the Chicago School of Economics. It's not that he seriously studied there. Had he done so, had he thought at all about economics or had some innate talent for algebra, calculus and economics, he might have seen the flaws in the absolutism and smug theories of the Chicago School. But, unfortunately, he just gawked in awe as people around him talked a gibberish that convinced him they understood how money and the power that money brings work.

Obama was mistaken. And instead of really getting a recovery, we just have a slow economic descent that is picking up momentum on the way down.

It is very sad. I don't know how anyone can be optimistic in the current environment.

Obama is preaching and trying to pursue policies of cooperation. But he has never laid the groundwork for his cooperative approach. It is a noble idea, but he is trying to apply it in the angriest, most divided America that we have seen since the Viet Nam War.

And when I see him, a well-meaning individual, being completely unrealistic about the social and political context in which he is trying to cooperate with recalcitrant, power-hungry, dominant Apes on the other side, I feel very pessimistic.

I watched a National Geographic show on Stress last night. It discussed research on baboons. The Republicans are sort of playing Alpha males, and Obama is countering with kind of a subservient approach. Obama is headed for serious trouble. That also makes me pessimistic.

[Mimosa]

64. +1,000,000

Simple, isn't it? The president should boldly be espousing those certain solutions, JD.

[fascisthunter]

20. anyone paying attention the last few years should be skeptical

saying folks shouldn't is ridiculous... people's dismay comes from a chain of bad decisions made by people we elected. I'd say folks here are actually more realistic than your OP.

[Silent3]

26. Who said people shouldn't be skeptical?

Can you point to that in any of my posts? Or are you just so damned certain of your ability to "read between the lines" that I might as well just call it quits and admit that I was most definitely recommending placid, trusting acceptance?

If you're wrong about reading my meaning (which you most definitely are), why should I take your evaluation of world problems seriously? Why should I not at least consider that your views might often be tainted, as demonstrated here, by black-and-white thinking, gratuitous oversimplification, and a desire to demonize your opponents?

[Bluenorthwest]

34. Then what action would you like to see inspiried by your post?

What is the objective?

[Powdered Toast Man]

25. Point proven by the responses.

Seriously... WTF is going on here? Granted I haven't been around in a while, but holy shit. Is THIS how it is around here now?

[Posteritatis]

43. And how; ugh

I made a similar post I think a couple years ago and got a lecture about how despair is the only appropriate emotion for real humans, or some similarly inane wangst.

[pipi_k]

44. My favorite wangst song...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ5ob9B9yD4



:7

[Posteritatis]

46. Hee!

Having had a crappy day, I needed something like that. :)

[Marrah_G]

29. I am certainly pessimistic

My family and I have turned our negative view on where this country is heading into positive movement on where WE are moving. Better to prepare for the future then to stick ones head in the sand while trying to blow rainbows out your butt :)

[JDPriestly]

50. I assume you are still in the pre-retirement age group.

Because if you were 70 right now, you might be quite pessimistic and with good reason.

[RandomKoolzip]

30. No one here WANTS SS or Medicare to be gutted. No one here WANTED

Obama to fuck up this bad. No one here WANTED the Dem leadership to be either this ineffectual or this craven to sell out to corporate interests. If we point that out, it's not out of glee or excessive pessimism, it's because we're realistic and we're cynical from being burned so many times.

As Frank Zappa once said, "I haven't gotten more cynical, I just have more evidence to back up my cynicism." Pointing out that things are bad is not the same as wishing them to be bad and I wish people would try and make that distinction.

[Fumesucker]

35. Well said.. You should post that as an OP.. n/t

[Johonny]

45. pretty much

[pipi_k]

31. Oh no....

here we go again with some of the "If you aren't completely depressed/outraged/suicidal/banging your head on the wall, then you're not paying attention" stuff from the crowd that thinks its "reality" is the only one.

Or, at least, that's the way it seems from some of the replies here.


If a person has a "reality", then fine. Then that's that's their reality. What really makes me want to scream is when people try to force their own realities on others, usually by using shame or derision.

"Oh...YOU haven't been paying attention"

"YOU must be terribly naive"


yeah. Right.

Anyway, I'm one of those millions of Americans on SS too. I'm concerned.

But I'm not going to allow my concern to devolve into hysterics or eye popping hyperbole. And yeah...it's hyperbole and hysterics when, instead of there being a handful of threads that get lots of replies, there are 50+ threads, all sounding like the authors are first cousins to Chicken Little.

I get your point.

Concern, OK.

Hysterics and rage over something that hasn't even happened yet...well, maybe people who can't get past it need help of some kind...

:shrug:

[lunatica]

37. In reading the responses it seems you've wasted your time

I think the kind of pessimism you're talking about is innate for people who simply can't see a ray of light or a silver lining or acknowledge the fact that in much of what we feel we actually have free will. It is true that sometimes 'they' are out to get us, but whether they actually get us has a lot to do with our reactions. I think you're right to say that some people seem to be more afraid of being fooled for fear of seeming naive. It's easier to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

In my life having the attitude of adapting and doing the next necessary thing is what has worked best. That and knowing that all things pass, since they always have before, helps me to deal with problems. In the last couple of years I've been through a layoff, a death in the family, being forced to declare bankruptcy, and coming perilously close to foreclosure yet my mortgage company granted me a loan modification at the 11th hour. And I certainly didn't go through it with smiles and giggles of naive optimism. I adapted. I work two part time jobs, and this makes me feel fortunate as long as I have the jobs. I just had to pay $500 dollars to fix the brakes on my car and the passenger window is blown out because I can't afford to fix it and a tune up is out of the question too. Because of it we ate rice and beans for weeks and had to borrow money for gas and to pay a bill.

But I'm sure plenty of people would tell me that I don't get it because what if I didn't get work after being laid off, or what if I had been foreclosed on. My answer is I would adapt. Lots of people who live under bridges or in tent cities are doing just that. Adapting.

That's not to say I don't shake my fist and rail at the powers that be. I have plenty of emotional fire and gut turmoil against those who deliberately hurt us for greed or personal gain. But I see the difference between being victimized and being a perpetual victim. In my view they win the moment I give up and acknowledge they've won. They haven't won in the long run. Their win is but a temporary thing until the tide turns as it always does. Nothing is permanent.

[Bluenorthwest]

38. I think those who call for positivity and silent politics

are basically interested in seeming to be 'right' about things, and they are fearful to be seen advocating too strongly for the elderly or sick, because in their ethical world, to advocate strongly for something that is righteous is not as important as keeping their cards close so that later, they can say 'I was right all along'. Too bad they don't want to DO the right thing all along, just appear to have 'predicted correctly' and tell the advocates who won the day to 'eat crow' for advocating for the best possible outcome.
How shameful to be see strongly calling for the right thing!

[Silent3]

40. What I'm saying isn't anything against "strongly calling for the right thing"

Talking like you're absolutely, positively certain that Obama is "in on it" as the Rich and Powerful deliberately scheme and plot to crash the world economy, all part of their dastardly plan to become even richer and more powerful on top of the ash heap of civilization isn't "strongly calling for the right thing".

I can, and do, easily call for many things to be done better than they are now. I know lots of people are guilty of real misdeeds. But I also know that I really don't know how badly or not things will turn out, who exactly is guilty of what, be it true cunning evil or stupidity or being mislead, and that acting as if I do know all of that doesn't have squat to do with improving the situation.

The very fact, however, that you'd even interpret my OP as you did, however, is a perfect example of what I'm talking about: You couldn't simply consider what I said as it was said without putting it through an extreme black-and-white filter first, so you could then vent your anger at your own straw man.

[JDPriestly]

51. I'm sure you must have read my posts about Timothy Geithner's affiliations.

Just Google it. I have posted links so many times, I don't want to do it again.

Pete Peterson is a Republican and an arch-enemy of Social Security.

Pete Peterson headed the committee that selected Timothy Geithner to serve as head of the NY Fed.

Of course, as you know Obama picked, out of the world of people qualified for the post, Timothy Geithner, to be his Secretary of the Treasury. And since Obama had people to vet his appointments, Obama had to have known that Geithner was a Pete Peterson pick at the Fed (in addition to the fact that Geithner had overlooked the imminent crash of the Market when it was part of his job to prevent such an occurrence).

So, Obama had to know that Geithner was a Pete Peterson (anti-Social Security) protege when Obama appointed him.

If that isn't enough to convince you that Obama has been duplicitous about his stance on Social Security from the beginning, check out his appointments to the Deficit Reduction Commission. That Commission was stacked to favor anti-Social Security people. The outcome of their work was predictable. Obama made sure of that.

So I have not become a pessimist based on no information. Obama has disappointed me time after time.

Look at my avatar. I would prefer a politician who cheats on his wife to a politician who lies to and cheats on the American people.

[joeybee12]

39. It's the result of looking at past results...it's that simple...nt

[Silent3]

41. No, nothing is all that simple.

History has examples of both bad and good trends, things falling apart when everyone predicted that, not falling apart when it was predicted, surprising people by falling apart unexpectedly, etc. There is, of course, always someone predicting doom, so that when doom does come, there can't help but be a crowd that turned out to be "right".

[saras]

42. I don't see extreme pessimism on DU to ANY significant degree

Obama is a corporatist, and based on his previous behavior, can be expected to continue forwarding the theft of American resources.
We are utterly failing in coming to terms with global climate change and our role in creating it.
We are in the midst of a mass species extinction, and have no idea whether humans will be one of the surviving species.

Them's just the facts, not optimistic or pessimistic. So what's an optimistic approach for actually dealing with them?

I don't find long, petty arguments about whether the thieves should take our underpants or not, having stolen everything else we were carrying. Likewise the idea that letting them have the pants will satisfy them to the point where they will hire us, even though naked, and let us earn enough money to buy our possessions back.

But any discussion that admits the nature and size of our problems, and ponders the appropriate scale of responses, I see as ultimately optimistic.

[girl gone mad]

54. I agree with what you say.

And to it, I would add that I find many of the President's recent pronouncements to be extremely and unrealistically pessimistic. The government doesn't need to budget the way a household does, for instance. Instead, the government balance sheet should be run in a manner which most benefits the people.

The government's economic role is to further the prosperity of the private sector, not to benefit at the expense of the private sector. Framing the debate as if the government is impeding private growth paints a very negative and inaccurate view of the government's important and necessary function in the economy.

[Jim Warren]

52. Much of my frustration

comes from the realization that the scope of problems we face are not so much political as systemic. Obama, or anybody like him, doesn't seem equipped to tackle that, rather continue stoking the status quo.

We are facing huge challenges and my fear is if some bold progressive doesn't come forth soon and reset the compass and the course, some corn-pone populist fascist will.

[ipaint]

53. Decades of irrational, childish "positive thinking" got us here.

Time to grow up.

"We need to brace ourselves for a struggle against terrifying obstacles, both of our own making and imposed by the natural world. And the first step is to recover from the mass delusion that is positive thinking."

http://www.barbaraehrenreich.com/brightsidedexcerpt.htm

[Jim Warren]

55. Ehrenreich

reminded me that the basis of critical thinking was criticism.

[Prism]

56. It's neither rage nor doom.

It's fear. Fear of powerlessness, fear that the America we have known and the parts of it we cherish are slipping away before our eyes. Over the past ten or so years, a grim inevitability has developed that this country is falling apart and that Washington has neither the desire nor the will to tackle the heart of the problem. Instead of addressing the corruption of the corporate and financial classes, how they rigged government and regulation to enable the theft of trillions from the public treasury, we're getting austerity measures with the poor, the weak, the most vulnerable among us being thrown overboard first in order to keep the rapidly deteriorating ship of state afloat.

In a country of 310 million, 536 people in Washington hold the keys to our future. They are unresponsive, unintelligent, and unconcerned about just how out of their depth they are to fix the deep economic problems we face. They have a vested interest in not addressing these problems, as the people most pleased by the greatest theft in American history are the ones dumping billions into campaign coffers across this country.

How do you feel that feeling of powerlessness should best be expressed? I prefer rage. Rage at least denotes people still care. It's the people who aren't upset that worry me. It's the people who passively watch as it all goes under the waves who have most enabled the political class to behave in such a destructive, incompetent manner.

We need more rage, not less. A passive, accepting populace never got a damn thing done. Politicians only act when they fear the consequences.

Who do they fear when so many are so accommodating when it's their own team enabling this country's ruin?

[alsame]

60. Very well said, Prism. nt

[somone]

58. Frogs in boiling pot don't need a psychoanalyst to tell them to relax

The fear and skepticism are well justified

[TheKentuckian]

59. False positivity is the grease those running us into the ground and stripmining the country need to

maintain the conditions that allow their malicious acts to roll on.

At some point, one has to work off the greatest probabilities the evidence is damning.

"Little" tells often say more than enough because of where they unfailingly go.

If you leave an anti-trust exemption for the insurance cartel then there is no intent to regulate them.

If you refuse to invest in even the most essential infrastructure like water and sewers then you have no long range plans for a society.

If you don't care about or in some cases display disdain for our civil liberties you don't support self determination and you do come down on the side of authoritarianism.

If you give banksters a wink and a nod on absurd payouts that are the direct fruit of crashing the economy, you don't intend to reign them in.

If you refuse to even seriously consider ending too big to fail then you cannot intend to make the economy safe from the sheer gravity of such companies.


Some paths logically preclude other outcomes.

In the end for me intentions are not that important. Pursuing policies that have proven results means your motivations or theories aren't so important, what is crucial is that it is nearly inevitable what will happen aside from unforeseen new outside stimulus on the situation or blind luck.

[JoePhilly]

61. Knee-jerk outrage is more fun.