The Mis-Education of America: Why we are, where we are ...

Time will tell the tale we tell…Shakespeare anyone?

Shakespearean characters illustrate that tragic heroes are neither fully good nor fully evil. But then it’s not until later as the plot thickens, a hero's mistakes rather than his quintessential goodness or evil, brings about the hero’s tragic downfall. As so, the irony of our nation’s economic woes could play out on the world stage like a Shakespearean play, with America playing the role of the “tragic hero”.

However one chooses to describe where we are as a country is really a matter of personal preference, seemingly dependent upon what one’s definition of “is” is… But ultimately - judgment of the day should be left to posterity. Thus how we react to this current national crisis will tell the tale of our time. Will it be our tragedy? Or could it all really be a blessing? Whichever way, we must examine why we are, where we are. And frankly, why we are at this point proves to be a more poignant question, appropriately critical to finding our way past this seminal moment in world history.

Approaching the question of the why obviously starts with asking why in the most earnest way possible. Though the trouble (or beauty) in doing that is that it exposes some harsh realities of our socio-economic doctrine. And unfortunately these realities suggest that we have created a narcissistic culture intoxicated on wealth and self-love…rendering our society (and inherently our government) incapable of defining the American values that will lead our country and the world to a more promising future.

The current economic “crisis” is about more than just the economy. To a larger extent - this crisis is more so about us. Too many of us champion an economy that places more value into the acquisition of wealth than anything else. And to that point, one does not need to look past the institution of slavery in America (exploiting society for profit) to recognize that our visions of free-market capitalism have been misguiding this country from its inception.

Winston Churchill once said, “Capitalism is the worst of all possible economic systems, with the exception of all the others…” As true as Churchill’s statement is- does it do a disservice to capitalism? In his quasi-defense of capitalism, is Churchill also suggesting that capitalism’s shortcomings are the fault of its own? If so, Churchill has seriously underestimated the human component of capitalism.

Some may disagree, but there is something satisfyingly innate about capitalism. In fact, capitalism seems to be a natural product of a democratic society, and as innately American as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Capitalism allows one a path to create their own lives, resulting in a multitude of advances including, but not limited to health-care, education, technology, and energy. However, in America, we seem to have developed a narcissistic perspective of our own weaknesses and flaws, one that renders us incapable of regulating ourselves to operating above the dark side of capitalism. Moreover, principles of our socio-economic doctrine have run amuck, but yet we remain crippled by their factors, and seemingly for no other reason besides conserving the American way?

But there is a curious cause and effect quandary where capitalism and human nature converge. Are we crippling capitalism, or is capitalism crippling us? In 1979, Christopher Lasch wrote the best-selling book: The Culture of Narcissism: American Life in an Age of Diminishing Expectations. Lasch’s book, considered avant-garde in 1979, maintains its vanguard status today in 2009. In his typically insightful, yet methodical, quasi-scientific way, Lasch proposes that capitalism will give rise to a personality-type consistent with clinical definitions of narcissism. Moreover, today’s economic, political, and social realities support, even probably prove Lasch’s theory as indispensible. Has a narcissistic complex rendered us vulnerable by way of arrogance, greed, and relative ignorance? (This is possible- but does that possibility necessarily constitute a flaw in capitalism, or us?)

Arguably the biggest capitalist of our time, Bill Gates, says that he has grown impatient with the shortcomings of capitalism. In particular, he said he is troubled that advances in technology, health care and education tend to help the rich and bypass the poor. "We have to find a way to make the aspects of capitalism that serve wealthier people serve poorer people as well," Mr. Gates told world leaders in a speech at the 2008 World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. In his speech, Mr. Gates introduced his latest project, “creative capitalism”. According to Mr. Gates, creative capitalism’s notion is to use market forces to address poor-country needs that he feels are being ignored. But in a time where it is hard to argue capitalism’s ethical successes here in America- Mr. Gates has stepped down as head of Microsoft to pursue his “creative capitalism” ideas? To utilize his resources in an effort to spur economic development and advancements in “other” poor countries? At first look, it’s hard to readily find fault with Mr. Gates’ project – but on further analysis - is it a stretch to view Mr. Gates “goodwill” as another example of the narcissistic complex that plagues our society? Gates’ thought of pioneering a corporate “feel good” mission to improve the lives of people in other poor countries, but - in a way that makes a profit for the “feel good” company (hence the name, creative capitalism)? So not just for charity, but for charity and profit? Creating profits from poor and starving countries? The thought in and of itself seems to lack perspective and verges on laying the framework for something obscene and exploitative in nature to occur. It seems that Mr. Gates’ perspective on capitalism and the state of our own union is disconnected from reality. As so, Mr. Gates reaction and/or perspective on the strengths and weaknesses of capitalism seem to be akin to the same sort of narcissism that allows Americans to “stay the course”, despite our relatively dire social, economic, health, educational, and energy situations.

The tragedy that America finds itself in is that it has yet to control its own delusions of grandeur, allowing capitalism to run amuck without truly acknowledging its negative influence on society – in effect- failing capitalism by not attempting to mitigate the ways in which capitalism exposes our own collective weaknesses.

But to the extent that capitalism is essential to our democracy…who, or what is charged with guaranteeing an ethical marketplace to practice capitalism (in accord to the natural ethical balance that is needed to maintain a stable economy)? Our government? Well…our government should not be in the business of guaranteeing, or preventing capitalistic success for anyone; however it should be in the business of guaranteeing a fair and ethical market – for everyone. And to meet that guarantee, a government must grow along with society in its size and its understanding. And our laws and regulations should reflect a society that is conscious of the realities of our own strengths and weaknesses, and the fragile balance between them and our public policies.

In a democracy, the onus is on the people to raise their collective intelligence, via an earnest attempt to break away from antiquated sentiments and archaic socio-economic policies. And in a democracy, we have the luxury and the responsibility of reassessing our values and adjusting socio-economic policies in order to reflect the advances and/or the evolution of a more conscious society. Capitalism is starving for etiquette and civic pride, begging for sensibilities to be factored into our policies and regulations concerning banking, health, education, and economic inequalities…reflecting an understanding of the need to regulate individuals in order to prevent them from capitalizing on the exploitation of our country’s most valuable resources – people.

Time will tell the tale we tell…