How to Hear when Everyone is Yelling

A soft electronic click is heard. A flash of controlled pixels streamed from some remote station appears on a screen. The feast of idiocy and bullshit begins. It’s impossible to listen to any of it anymore. Describing the message of modern politics as “mixed” would be like calling New Orleans “wet.” It is an extraordinary understatement. The extreme left would have us believe that Bush is going to close his eyes, spin a globe, put his finger down, and start dropping bombs wherever he is pointing. Quid pro quo, the right would have us believe that every courthouse needs a fifty ton marble rendition of the Ten Commandments, and every statue of Jesus should have a copy of the Constitution stapled to his chest.1

Despite the deluge of propaganda that gets slung at Americans on a daily basis, the majority of the nation remains moderate. This is the so called “silent majority.” Whether they are silent due to utter frustration, disgust, or total apathy remains to be seen. If this country is to come out of this deadlock of jargon and idiocy we must hope that the last option is untrue.2

This leads to the obvious question, what is the average person to do? What is the person who doesn’t fully believe either side to do about such things? What can be believed, and what can’t? Well citizens, I’m hear to offer a little bit of advice that can serve to silence the cacophonies of Ann Coulter and Michael Moore 3

The best way to describe my theory is through the use of allegory and analogy. A man is in a market. This is not a modern market, but a market of days pass. Haggling is a situation that seems commonplace here. This marketplace has two distinct fish vendors. The man knows not which one he wants to purchase from. He approaches the first fish vendor. The fish vendor can tell this man is an experienced haggler, so the vendor realizes he will never sell his fish for his asking price. Therefore he makes his asking price ludicrous, far higher than any man would likely pay. The man that is shopping is slightly angered at this, so he says that he will more likely than not go to the other vendor. The first vendor immediately goes into a tirade about how terrible the other vendor is. His fish are low quality, they aren’t cleaned properly, and neither is the equipment that is used by the fishermen that catch it. The man decides to go investigate the other vendor’s fish for himself. Can you guess what happens? The same farce with slightly different players, and slightly changed wordplay.4

Now I must analyze this allegory. Neither vendor’s fish were better than the others, they were just different. Both knew that nothing really distinguished him or set him apart from the other, so he resorted to attacking his opponent since he could not make himself seem any better. This leaves the consumer utterly confused. He knows not what to do, or who to believe. So he goes home without buying any fish at all.5

Here I’ll bring it all back to modern times. Political figures, particularly pundits, want us to believe things they say. This is the asking price. They know of Americans’ tendency to mistrust political things. Ergo, what they say has what they want us to believe in it, but it is very embellished. I.E. the inflated asking price. Since neither side is right in its entirety they result to mudslinging in order to make the other side seem less desirable. This leads to the majority of people, who do not fully believe either side, to be utterly confused, and, like the man, they wind up going home with nothing, full of apathy.6

Now the ever burning question. What can be done about all of this? There are three basic things. Firstly, recognize the shit for what it is, on both sides. Voting against the Patriot Act does not mean you want America to all. Neither does thinking prayer should be allowed in schools mean you hate freedom of speech. Secondly realize that mud slinging, for the most part, should be included in the fore mentioned bullshit. Just because GW has relations with the Saudis doesn’t mean that he is an oil whore that is sucking our country dry for the benefit of oil executives. Neither are all liberals spineless anti-American cowards. Finally, keeping with out shit based theme, GIVE A SHIT! The root of the problem lies in us, the citizens. For one reason or another; disgust, apathy, confusion, ect; we’ve stopped caring. We’ve allowed the idiots up on Capitol Hill to dance around foolishly and obliterate everything for to long. As long as the citizens are taking an active role in the government things will get done. If no one votes, manipulating elections is very easy. If no one protests, declaring war seems almost mundane. If no one digs through the jargon, the truth will never be found. It’s your country, let it be destroyed, or start fixing it.7

Author notes

I had a random thought. The analogy i mention in the story. I decided I needed to expland and write it down before I forgot it. I didn't really spend any time refining it, it just seemed to be one of those things I had to either write now or never.

this is fairly rough, so feel free to tear it apart, definately not my best work

    : , Your review:

    Comment Suggestion: What is your your first impression?
    : Cost: 0 free left 0 points, You have 0. (?) (Line numbers)
    Ratings:

Comments


  • IvoryRose
    July 12, 2006

    Edit | Reply

    Very Intriguing

    I must say I am slightly offended by this piece. And not for the reasons you might think. The political aspect is true, as is the apathy of the common man. What truly offends me is the fact you felt it necessary to explain the analogy. I found it quite obvious and the paragraph after it disrupted my flow. I felt like I was being told that I am stupid and need to be retold what has just been said in laymans terms. I like your points however. This seems like a well-thought out driven piece. I enjoy how firmly you stand behind your opinions and beliefs. It's a good write, though I could see it being better. It seems you set out to write a political article, and did a good job, now I could see you writing a satire based on this piece and doing a great job. Overall I like it, and hope that my comment does not upset you. Good luck.

    beginning: 5, language: 4, plot: 4, ending: 5.


    • Ezekiel Goldstein
      July 13, 2006

      Edit | Reply

      I am quick to rise, but you don't need to apologize in advance.

      You make me laugh with that part. To be honest, I did the analogy explanation for the reason that a lot of people aren't good at catching symbolism. I wrote this like it was to be published in a magazine that is read by the more common man. It is kind of insulting, but in some instances neccesary.