I don't know if it is linked to the fact that I love to verbally spar? That one of my favorite board games is Diplomacy (some other ones that are on the high list are Civilization, Risk and a bunch of role playing games where you "convince others" and have to be good with words). It's probably a safe bet to say that if I would've followed the guidance counsellor in high school who stated "your grades and interest indicate that you would fit very well going into Law school or PoliSci" I would've been more likely to be manipulative and telling lies on a regular basis. (Power corrupts and all that). I got a fair shake in student politics back in my uni days and could've worked that angle instead of the precious microbes, alas the microbes won that battle. Nowadays I'm realizing my job takes me more and more into the political arena, not to mention management and all the double speak that one can find there and working with legal documents. Oh, the legal documents and the "weighing words and implications"...
I'm digressing, as usual with these blog posts.
I've realized after this last week watching and reading way too many speeches by people in politics that I need to come up with a strategy to deal with my hot temper that flare up on a regular basis. Otherwise I won't make it through November. I get offended by the blatant lies and the inconsistencies that are prevalent and so very common at the moment in the media and politics. I end up having long monologues in the car, talking to invisible debate challengers, whom I want to flatten. Not to mention that I have a burning desire to "educate the public" on the lies that are spewed and the fallacy (so called logic...) arguments that some voice. Is no one knowing history or "old things" anymore*? My core feelings of decency and how I was taught politics back in the day as a young little girl marching in protests and handing out voting ballots are vastly different than the tactics being on display in the current day. (Yes, I also feel ancient.)
My issue that I somehow love the real evil characters in stories and their smart and intellectual comments, like Blofeld or double agents in Cambridge back in the 1960ies. The audacity of a nicely crafted omission. The skill to prevaricate so the interviewer doesn't notice that the question wasn't really answered. Somehow it leads me to feel valued since the person takes an effort to craft a lie that they don't want me to notice, to make it sly under the radar and make me work for it. The old school "word duelling" to hone in on the importance of words. That words matter and that we should care WHAT and HOW we say since Words matter. That there is an art of writing beautiful and making a convincing, honest argument and winning the debate. The more noble part of verbal sparring rather than a round of fisticuffs**
I guess to a large part this plays to my conviction that words matter since they come before actions, and that certain actions have enormous consequences and that these might not ever be retracted or undone. Thus the need to weigh ones words and be careful not to overuse and extrapolate.
My noble intention of being a bigger person (and a non elitist) falls apart when I endure ugly speeches, without any type of allegories or tropes, or filled with lies and repeats. When there are no well crafted figures of speech, no mentioning of historic important people, quotes or actions. When all there is are pathetic lies built on made up realities and "mistakenly put together words that other's read things into"***. An example; comment made by Mr Manafort in regards to the whole Mrs Trump speech "What she did was use common words". As if common words in a specific order cold not be linked to someone specific, be made historic or need acknowledgment of references? They have to be "uncommon words" to make an impression? ('I have a dream' comes to mind, although perhaps Mr Manafort is not familiar with that string of words and the origin that made them famous? Or perhaps "Ask not what your country can do for you"... many common words in one sentence.) A good speech doesn't have to be elaborate. It can be short, sweet and honest. Some of the best are.
To end this rant before I lose the interest of my few kind readers. I'm really hoping, yet I understand it might be in vain, that the convention next week at least consists of less lies, fewer ugly speeches and perhaps - and I know I'm completely showing every card on my hand now - even some concrete ideas, examples and fact based statements with clear references of historic people and actions that have changed the world. I know, I'm clearly naive and in for more rounds of car talks; me against the air.
References: a link to BBC Ethics summary about ethics and lying. A book by Sissela Bok in case you are interested in reading more on the morals of lying, how it influences society and what can happen when you start with small white lies "for the good" etc.
* There is a longer story here about a shorter summary of the history of Turkey, Europe, Ukraine and Iraq that I ended up giving at work since there was a misconception on stabile countries that have been around forever. I did breifly touch on the oil crisis and flight hijackings landing in Cyprus as well. (not bragging, but maybe a story for another blog post since "lack of history and general knowledge" is another one of those small nagging issues I have.)
**Although to be honest, at the moment I would take an honest fist fight over the sad lies that are being spread faster than wildfire. Maybe fight club over presidency? Or Thunderdome?
***is this really proper English or just another badly written sentence from an ESL?
No comments:
Post a Comment