A grumpy view of media, education, and government
Media: Many are protesting in the streets and in the media. “Black lives matter” has become such a poignant voice in the wilderness of despair that those who assert “All lives matter” are condemned as racists. Print, radio, and television news has lapsed too far into reporting only stories that favor only left wing or only right wing viewpoints.
Balanced media commentary features people of the left and people of the right shouting at one another; rarely is either viewpoint presented coherently. Persons fulfilling the role of moderator select at least one articulate person on each side of a controversial issue; neither the moderators nor the passionate shouters exhibit significant knowledge about the topic. At the end of a two minute segment, moderators may thank the shouters, mouthing platitudes such as “good debate” even though nothing resembling an actual debate has occurred. Old bromides like “if it bleeds, it leads” appear to govern media policy, as if good news is boring, bad news is frightmongering, and only controversy improves ratings.
Education: Educational standards have moved away from standards of achievement and toward standards of political correctness. Participation is rewarded and competition is derided. Instead of encouraging every student to discover and develop her or his unique set of skills and abilities, everyone gets a trophy. Children’s programming and video games have replaced outdoor activities as the recreation of choice.
Government: Somebody oughta do something. Isn’t that why we hire educators, garbage collectors, and government officials? Getting our money’s worth hiring educators is a no-brainer: if every child gets a trophy education must be great, right? No? How about something any parent is in a position to know? If my child is actively working to discover and develop her or his unique set of talents, we are getting our money’s worth.
Knowing if we are getting our money’s worth hiring garbage collectors is easy too: we can see whether they take away our trash or scatter it in the street. At the local government level we know whether there are potholes in the streets; do homeless get fed or urinate on the sidewalk? do the thugs and thieves get put in jail? do the police get paid or get shot? can a new business get started? I suppose we-the-people could at least agree and see how well local governments do.
But at the national level we-the-people are divided in our views of what good government should do. We are united, though, in our belief that the Feds aren’t governing well. People on the political left and political right agree that the Federal Government is not doing its job:
- Too many people and nations around the world do not like the USA.
- Our natural environment is becoming more and more polluted.
- Too many people are living in poverty in the USA.
- Both the rich and the poor could do more to resolve the disparity between rich and poor.
- The “other guys” are to blame for much that is wrong.
- It might be too late to persuade the “other guys” of their wrongness or our rightness.
We are near a tipping point.
Charles Murray’s recent book By the People portrays a pessimistic—he would say, realistic—view that we have passed the tipping point. https://arizonadailyindependent.com/2016/03/29/book-review-and-thoughts-about-by-the-people/ Murray did not reach that view easily. He had written about government issues back in 1984 when he published Losing Ground: American social policy 1950-1980. He argued that President Lyndon Johnson’s laudable Great Society programs had fallen short. As one reviewer put it, the well-documented book “lays out a stark truth that must be faced: two decades of well-meaning programs to erase racism and poverty in the U.S. have left those at the very bottom worse off than ever.” That conclusion still stands, we continue to lose ground as the problems have gotten worse during the most recent decades.
Murray did not just complain. He offered prescriptions for greater success when he wrote another book: In Pursuit of Happiness and Good Government. The book, published in 1988, provides a coherent set of ideas for what government can do successfully and what government cannot do. If government tries to do everything, it is sure to fail in many things.
Murray opened Chapter 9 with these words: “The three large assertions of this book so far have been that we ought to use the pursuit of happiness as the criterion of success in making social policy, that the design of policy solutions must reflect one’s understanding of human nature, and that these things constitute … something that policy analysts ought actually to do … “
This means that we should question every social policy:
- “Does this policy help actual individuals pursue happiness?”
- “Is this policy consistent with what we—both scientists and citizens—know about what people actually do in the world we actually have?”
- “If we pursue this policy, does it consume resources that could be better used elsewhere?”
Pursuing Good Government Without Shouting
My summary of Murray’s arguments is that government can help level the playing field to support equality of opportunity but it cannot guarantee equality of results. My friends on the left object that this is a pessimistic view: “It admits defeat at the outset if we say we cannot guarantee equality of results!” I say, “Please show me one area of human endeavor in which no one performs better than any other, in which all can run at the same high speed, swim the same turbulent river, climb the same tall mountain, compose a great symphony, write a great American novel, or hit major league pitching half the time!” my friends say “That is unfair!” I say “It is how things actually are!” I have not persuaded them; they have not persuaded me.
I believe that if our government officials, at every level, ask the 3 questions above about every policy or law or funding decision, we would have much better equality of opportunity and much less disparity of results, both economically and socially. But I also believe that, in the years since Murray wrote In Pursuit of Happiness, lawmakers have not viewed their work through the lens of “Does it use our (limited) tax dollars to help real people pursue happiness in the world we actually live in?” I believe government officials would do so more often if you and I and a few more of we-the-people, would ask the 3 questions above more loudly, more persistently, and in every forum, public or private.