Waiting for the Feel Good Revolution; Or, In Defence of Cynicism

Two years ago I sat in a Halifax convention room listening to Bill Clinton give an intensely eloquent and vapid speech for a few hundred doe-eyed people. It took all of my will power not to walk out.

Then I figured, screw it, I'm wasn't working and I hadn't even paid to be there, so I walked out.

I recall this because of a highly entertaining dispute recently between Tim Bousquet, news editor of Halifax's alt weekly The Coast, and (a few vocal spokespeople for) a group of young, upwardly mobile professionals called Fusion. (Full disclosure: Tim and I are both members of a highly ineffective alcoholism support group.)

Basically, Bousquet accused Fusion of being naive Pollyanas, while they shot back that Tim is a cynic who holds back progress.

Funny thing is, they're all backwards. Tim isn't a cynic, he's a hardcore idealist. The Fusion headliners are, if not cynics, playing into inaction.

Tim takes a dim view of the world's prospects - skyrocketing oil prices, looming environmental catastrophe, crippling financial debt, Oprah, etc. He calls for basically overthrowing the system to avert disaster. (Full disclosure: Tim and I co-founded a barbershop quartet in Skokie, Illinois, but it broke up acrimoniously and that son of a bitch still has my cane.)

Meanwhile Fusion's statements come out like, for example, this: "I think one of the most important things a community can do is to engage its citizens in a visioning process to determine collective priorities."

But what happens when you try to take the cliche seriously?

Let's try this one:

Platitude: "We need to be a net importer fo grey matter."

Reaction: "OMG, so true! Repost!"

Identifiable real world consequence: Well, I suppose reducing tuition fees to attract more students to post-secondary education. But then, at a time when we're paying those tuition decreases with borrowed money, how much is affordable? Should we be lowering tuition for rich kids who can afford it, or maybe put money into needs-based grants instead.

Also, attracting bright businesses in the information economy is a no-brainer. But how? Offering economic incentives? Will they just relocate if they get a better deal elsewhere? And again, in a time of deficit, is lowering corporate taxes going to spur enough economic activity to offset the loss in revenue?

From Clinton right on down to Vince the Slap Chop guy, motivational speakers are paid to use linguistic devices to make people feel better, while glossing over ugly truths/product defects.

They are paid, often quite well, to promote a consulting form of slacktivism. From "positivity" to changing your facebook status, the more people are made to feel good about doing nothing the less likely they are to do anything.

Many would interject here and say these motivational speeches are just the first step to rolling up our sleeves and getting to work. But look at what just happened in Halifax.

The decision to fund a multi-multi-multi-million dollar convention centre quickly became polarized. Tim flipped hard to the no-side and chain-wrote his way through a ton of CC-bashing pieces (Full disclosure: Tim and I went to Vegas this one time but I can't really talk about it.)

There were many of us on the fence who thought that Tim was reaching at times, but brought up valid concerns. We waited for the rebuttal.

But no counter-arguments had close to the factual heft of the pieces by Tim and other detractors. There was a lot of talk of the need for optimism, kick-starting the downtown, and other platitudes, but little in the way of data other than pointing to suspect business plans.

I'm not saying there wasn't a case to be made that rebutted the No side. In fact, for the purposes of this piece I'm not even saying the convention centre is a bad idea.

I'm saying that I didn't see anyone wade into the numbers and made that detailed defence. Even with hundreds of millions of dollars on the line, so many people were willing to support a project unwaveringly because they viewed it as being on the side of progress and optimism.

That's not a progressive mindset, it's a blind spot. And there are plenty of hucksters out there willing to exploit it with their synergistic, next-gen, game-changing, paradigm-shifting, 2.0 crap of the week.

The feel good revolution isn't a means, it's an end. It is an industry that self perpetuates - more talk, more soul searching, more self-affirmation. We get stuck in a holding pattern, waiting for Godot to show up with his magic answers while real world problems flow on unabated.

I guarantee you the people who set up a fraudulent financial system to make themselves rich didn't do it by debating grand ideals, they did it by manipulating cold, hard details. How are we supposed to fight that if our heads are in the clouds?

So here's my five-part appeal to the bright-side-of-life crowd:

- I know that you have good intententions, that you care, and that you genuinely want to affect positive change. And I know that cantankerous old bastards like Tim Bousquet can be insufferable. (Full disclosure: Tim has very soft hands.)

I'm not saying be like him. It's healthy to have a mix of Debbie Downers and Umberto Uppers. Optimism has its place. But-

- At some point you've got to research and advocate for real policy positions. And they're not going to be innovative or collaborative or dynamic, they're going to be old-fashioned, divisive and slow.

I'm not talking about "It'll take hard work," I'm talking about situations like Afghanistan, where our choices are stay and people die, or leave and people die. It's incumbent on us to decide the best of terrible options.

- Changing the world shouldn't just make you feel giddy or happy. It should charge you with a sense of purpose and self-sacrafice. The last part is important because even simple concepts like "going green" will require making changes that will not be easy, cheap, or fun.

- Draw the line between pessimism and defeatism. Things do go badly. We need pessimism to prepare for those scenarios. Don't assume that looking on the bright side is more valuable, or productive, or true than expecting the worst. That way lies delusion.

- Finally, be critical. There's no going back - people will be trying to spin us in many directions for the rest of our lives. We need skepticism to see through it. Use the journalism trick of the better something sounds, the closer you look at it.

I argue with Tim all the time over his ideas. I think some of his grand ideas for social change are over-simplified and out of reach. I argue for a more moderate approach because I think revolutions are too easily hijacked. So maybe I'm a cynic.

But, to steal some lines from my friend Laura Penny: Cynicism is good. Cynicism leads to being pissed off, being pissed off leads to taking action and taking action leads to social change.

I'll leave you with an inspirational quote.

"Thought = creation. If these thoughts are attached to powerful emotions (good or bad) that speeds the creation," - The Secret.

When you look at that and immediately see bullshit, you're on your way.

(Full disclosure: I am a member of secret cabal of Freemasons that run both the financial sector and the entertainment industry, and have a significant financial investment in keeping the working man down.)