GGM irked me a few weeks ago. He criticized a mutual organization that I (involuntarily) control. He had legitimate points. But he refused to do a damn thing to change the direction of the organization. He was given ample opportunities but refused to participate and enact his ideas.
I idly bitch and complain much more than GGM, but sometimes you have to see someone else making an ass of themselves before you see how asinine your own actions are. One can complain, but eventually, he has to shut up or put up.
Sam called the police on some boy who was walking on a frozen pond earlier this week. I made some comment like "I thought you were a libertarian." He came back with some Christian ethic that requires us to help our fellow man. I came back with: "Why did you call the police? Why didn't you stop and talk to him?" He eventually admitted that his real reason was personal guilt. He was afraid the boy would fall through, die, and he would have to read about it the next morning. He was afraid that the boy's mother's grief would haunt him for the rest of his life.
I do this type of thing all the time. I delegate personal problems and responsiblities to someone else.
Within this discussion lies a problem with our society. We expect someone else or the collective to do something for us. Someone said if I were a true libertarian, I would quit my government job. As long as I work for the government, I cannot complain about the government. I hate it, but she has a point (see note at end).
Sometimes you have to go out on a limb. The United States should do this with free trade and forget the WTO. Successful economists and professionals always do this. They do what they think is right, accept the consequences, and make no apologies. You cannot live a life waiting for others to see the light.
I comes before you.
[Note at end: Don Boudreaux (and I think I have to) has addressed this issue before, and there are arguments (rationalizations) against her proposition. I am not scared to find a non-governmental job, but as long as government handouts exist, why should I deny them. There is a positive and a normative world, and I can separate between them. Like with GGM, I disapproved of her presentation more than her idea.]
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
For the record, the opportunity for me to say my piece never presented itself. A random meeting of 5 students does not qualify. Nor does a lunch.
I figured you would have seen that I am more calculating. this topic is water under the bridge, but I'll bite. And for the record, your posted was a bit exaggerated.
My goal was simple: to make a point. And I did. You fail to recognize that by refusing to participate, I was participating.
I talked to many and made my opinions known. Even though I was not in attendance for 2 meetings on other pre-scheduled topics, I have communicated with persons who were, and oddly, most of my specific issues were addressed. Must be one big coincidence. who knows.
From your post "professionals always do this. They do what they think is right, accept the consequences, and make no apologies." I like the word unapologetic. I am unapologetic for refusing to participate or for my actions. If you disapproved of my presentation, then you and anyone else should have either told me to shut the hell up, or given me a reason to. By not, maybe you all were refusing to participate. Or maybe the horrid thought of accountability was ~scary~.
didn't feel like I made an ass of myself. I had justification. I said my piece. If anyone wants to feel better about themselves because I made a point, so be it. Maybe some people get empowered by singling others out. I actually think that's a sign of weakness. I think going out on a limb is not.
I'm not going to devote any more of my time to this topic. these past 2 minutes have been enough.
And for the record, now that I have finished this, a beautiful blond intelligent knockout girl with an engagement ring on just came into the computer lab over here at Donaldson brown. She was very pleasant and her presence put a smile on my face. If we keep harping on these intermediate topics, we will never afford the likes of such pleasant company for the long haul, much less the short.
GGM
After throughly establishing what isn't important the question remains: "What is it that we do here that is important?" Does anything we do have a consequential "so what" attached to it? I vote we focus more on questions like this and less on arguments.
This might be implied, but it should be: "what do I do that is important?"
Post a Comment