Dissecting the ‘Change’ Mantra
We need change in America. That’s the message that every politician seems to push. They are all “agents of change”. Each one of them believes that the brand of change he or she pushes is the kind of change that the electorate not only wants but desperately needs. The country is falling apart, you see, and if there isn’t change soon (and by soon, I mean sometime after January 2009), then… well, let’s just not consider it. It might be more of the same.
After all, the country is in obviously dire straits. Unemployment is… never mind. Inflation? No, not really. There’s a recession… looming… maybe. But really, we are all hurting. Or at least those people the media shows us. And it needs to be soon. Just as soon as (insert candidate name here) is elected.
Fear of change
But behind the calls for change is a genuine fear of change. The economy, for instance, cannot be allowed ebb and flow; it must remain constant. Or better yet, it must grow at a quicker and quicker pace. Home values can’t change, if change means a decrease in value. Again, constancy dictates ever rising home values. Anything less than constant positive movement in these areas is a world-stopping crisis, and we’re to believe that something must be done to stop the change.
The grand daddy of all fear of change issues is global warming, a.k.a. “climate change”. Some folks fear the well-established fact that global climate actually changes. They simply can’t accept that the earth gets warmer and colder because of forces much greater than humans and our CO2 emissions. Some folks believe this so much that they’re willing to do whatever it takes to “save the world”, even if staving off what may or may not be CO2-induced wrecks lives, economies and countries. Those changes are excusable only because they would be committed in the pursuit of “saving the world”. Climate change’s messianic vision trumps human suffering in the abstract.
[...]
As usual, you can assume lefties mean the opposite of what they are saying.
