Tuesday, July 15, 2008

"The Controversial Survey" - Part 2

Oh yes: Part 2.

So the "survey" itself was mediocre. After finishing it, I had this pit in my stomach... like, maybe people familiar with my personality would feel like my usual venom hadn't been spit... perhaps they would worry that I had caved in and become something "fluffy". To allay these fears, I present here a discussion of the subtexts of several of the questions from the "Controversial" survey.

I hope you find them ascorbic and thought provoking. Then ascorbic again. In that order.

"Do you have the guts to answer these Q's and repost as The Controversial Survey?"

"Q's"? You mean "questions"? For Christ's sake if you're going to climb up Mt. Soapbox and call something "The Controversial Survey" at least write the whole word "questions". No where else does this document descend into such pointless macho posturing bullshit; it's as if the author needed to lure me into the dark back alley of the survey with a pasty-white-rapper-boy faux persona before we could "talk business" and actually use whole words.

And what does it say about our society that we need to have "guts" to answer some charged semi-political opinion questions in public? "Oh, no, I'm not gutsy enough to have opinions -- I just think we should have sunshine and bunnies and whatever anybody else says!"

I say: bunnies are delicious the sun just gives you cancer! Stay inside! Feast on rabbit stew!

Parental Licensing

In one survey circulating around MySpace we have an example of parent's hitting their kids, a 12-year-old mother and a woman who killed her 5 children! What is this nonsense about letting anybody have as many kids as they want? Having a child is a tremendous responsibility, and most people aren't and won't ever be ready for it.

You should have to be licensed to have a child.

You should be required to demonstrate that you understand that children are expensive and that they cry a lot, and won't shake them to death because you wind up sleep deprived and fifty grand in debt.

You need to have a steady job that pays all your current bills with plenty left for your savings account (which you are required to have).

You need to demonstrate some basic knowledge of child care: diaper changing, feeding, nutrition, and so on.

We don't verify anything about people before we let them pop out babies at whatever rate they please. Do we worry at all about the impact this has on the children? I suppose some people would argue that having kids is some sort of God-given right -- something you can't take away from people. I say that's a load of steaming crap. Kids deserve to be raised by competent parents, not by blubbering idiots who treat them like another trophy dog or hunk of bling to parade around in front of their friends as a measure of status. Having a child isn't about feeling better about yourself, or strengthening your relationships: it's about raising a child. If you aren't 100% clear, certain and comfortable with that, I don't think it's a great idea for you to be raising the next generation.

Alcohol and Drugs

People have a unique talent for transforming small problems into epic and often misplaced and misunderstood battles. Alcohol, drugs, and cigarettes have all been solid examples.

16 year olds like to get totally shit-faced because they aren't allowed to. Would you like to end childhood diabetes? Make vegetables illegal and watch as the average childhood diet skyrockets into the land of ultra-healthy.

In general, we seem to believe we can keep people from doing things; this is entirely untrue. Kids who want to drink will. Adults who want to do coke will. People who want to smoke will.

Making these things illegal just makes them more interesting to younger people and more dangerous in general. A much better approach to these problems is honest education, and better laws.

Let's teach our 12 year olds what booze is and what it does. Let's let them have half a glass of wine at diner, or a beer out on the boat with the family. Then lets modify the penalties for the real issues related to drinking: got a DUI? You never drive again, ever. Period. No suspended license, no community service, no second chances. After all, we've been telling you about alcohol since you were 12! You know how fucked up you get when you're drunk, and if you can't keep your shit together enough to plan not to drive when you're drinking why on earth should we ever let you have another chance? You might kill somebody!

But it's important to notice that you're not killing somebody because you're drunk. You're killing somebody because you're an idiot. The alcohol isn't what made you stupid: you were stupid when you drove your own damn self to a bar to get hammered. That little planning mis-step happened before you had your fun.

There's much more to complain about regarding drugs in general -- but there's also more of the survey to dissect, so for now at least, I'll move on (perhaps I can revisit this gem in a later post).

The War in Iraq

There has been a surprisingly effective metamorphosis of the debate around the Iraq War: the real issue is not about the war itself -- the issue is about the process by which we "prepared for" and subsequently entered into war.

It's probably safe to say that Saddam Hussein wasn't going to win the "Most Bestest Dictator of the Year" award; and it's probably true that not having him in power -- considered in isolation (i.e. without regard for the mess that's filled the vacuum) -- is a "good thing".

The problem is that we got fed a heaping platter of horse-shit about why we should go to war, and what we were trying to accomplish in the war. We had no plan to successfully complete and exit a conflict because we lacked any interest in understanding the region we were about the enter into conflict with. We went ahead in the most consistent and well-known (and globally reviled) American tradition of deciding: "them's not us over there, so they must all be the evildoers and we can fuck'em up good and make things more American-y and that's better for ev'rybody!"

America thrives on an unspoken policy of isolationist delusion. We simply declare that we're the best at everything, then lump the outside world into the "Other" category. We, as a nation, are incapable of sensitivity or nuance, and we have become (or perhaps have always been) unable to examine ourselves in the harsh light of reality.

The war in Iraq must continue now, because it is not finished (though, it would be quite in character for us to abandon it mid-stream, having decided we'd done our part). But the people responsible for it should be eviscerated; our failure to do this may be the real lasting impression of the war abroad. We will show the world -- again -- that we do not hold accountable the people who blunder across the globe inciting the deaths of nearly-countless-thousands at a time; we will demonstrate -- again -- that as a people we are unable to find any way to approach a problem unarmed.

When the war is finished, we should take a long, hard look at the cost of the war. We should ponder the way in which this vast expense could be incurred for the sake of destruction, but we cannot educate our children and we cannot heal our sick.

Of course, we won't perform these examinations, because we are a society of impotent, fearful, greedy people. We are petty; and, terrifyingly, the only nation on the planet that has not accepted it is our own.