Glacial Erratics

Learned Helplessness

January 08, 2004

DavePollard has yet another fine post summarizing an article by MalcolmGladwell about why American's love the SUV. Dave extends the argument to raise an important point:    (2H2)

Gladwell leaves it at that, but the reader's mind cannot. The reality is that this delusion of danger, and the illusion that something can or has to be done, that someone -- British cows, Canadian farmers, Chinese cats, Firestone, Saddam Hussein -- must be brought to account in order to give us back control, is literally making us all crazy. It causes us to believe we cannot let children out of our sight even for a moment. It causes us to wildly change our diets, to avoid visiting whole countries, to fingerprint whole nations of visitors, to suspend civil liberties, to put barbed wire around our communities, to drink only bottled water, to wear masks, to introduce five levels of increasingly hysterical 'threat' to everyone's safety.    (2H3)

It is irrational, neurotic, panic-stricken behaviour, a wild over-reaction to a tiny uncontrollable risk while we recklessly disregard risks we could control and which kill and destroy lives in large numbers everyday -- air and water pollution, tainted food from corrupt and underregulated meat packers, drugs in sport and airplane cockpits, drunk drivers, kids with guns, corporate frauds, a prison system that incarcerates the mentally ill and encourages criminal recidivism -- and on and on and on. Unfortunately, it is also in the best interest of the media and governments to focus on the uncontrollable risks, and to pander to public fear and fascination with them. They're more sensational, more visceral. And since there's really nothing that can be done about them, you can do anything, or nothing, in response to them, and not be held accountable, or responsible.    (2H4)

Imagine the world we could have if we used the resources spent on the uncontrollable on realistic improvements to our lives.    (2H5)

Comments

1/1
On January 15, 2004 04:49 AM Andrea said:

I have a strong hunch about this.    (2HG)

Since some of the changes in social and family structure that began thirty-odd years ago, very few people's childhoods have featured the long stretches of unstructured time that were commonplace only a few years earlier.    (2HH)

An Montreal friend of mine recently wrote about some of the effects she thinks this has produced. (http://www.livejournal.com/users/zadcat/123077.html) I'm inclined not only to agree but to take it a step farther.    (2HI)

She and I have been talking about this for a dozen-odd years. We quickly determined that it had nothing to do with Canadian v. American experiences. (Michael Moore is simply wrong on that one, for a bunch of reasons I won't go into now.) For a long time we thought it was city v. suburbs, but that doesn't quite explain it either.    (2HJ)

I'd love to explore this in depth and crank out a book about this, but I get pangs of conscience about only being an armchair social scientist.    (2HK)

Sending...