betrayal

When it comes to logistics and preparedness, the mode of thinking needs to be logic and reason — not emotion. Pretend you’re an interstellar alien, we’ll call him Spock (or her Spockette, if you want to be equal opportunity), evaluating our relationship with central Federal bureaucracy from outer space.

Two pertinent points: First, when an entity has failed, over and over and over, to accomplish goals timely and accurately, is it logical to keep depending upon it, or to demand from it what it has repeatedly foot-dragged and failed to deliver? Spock(ette) says: No. Highly illogical.

What is that entity? Distant, detached, massive, red-tape-ridden, impersonal, faceless Federal bureaucracy. I’m speaking of the whole entity, as a large, bloated mass, not individual right-minded people inside it who are trying to improve things, mostly in futility.

Epidemiologists have been warning of a pandemic like the one ongoing, for over a quarter of a century. Yet through multiple D and R presidencies, multiple D, R and split Congresses, this is the result. Blaming only the current people (while they deserve just the latest few years’ share of it) is purely partisan, shortsighted, ignorant of history, and emotional — not logical, not reasoned.

This scenario has been warned about for DECADES, with only token, window-dressing action. Such longstanding foot-dragging in preparation for what has been an inevitable pandemic is just one example of such lack of foresight and attention to low-probability (in any one year), high-impact events that will happen some year. This is such a year.

Those who expertly predicted it for the last few decades have every right to say, “I told you so, why didn’t you listen to me and prepare?” And they are entirely reasoned and logical in asking such a question. Spock(ette) would approve.

This is why foreseers and visionaries get disillusioned: government bureaucracy — too debt-ridden and bloated from generations of exceeding its literal Constitutional authority in many areas — is too focused on the here and now and the pork-barrel pandering that doesn’t lend itself to accommodating accurate expert farsightedness. This is objectively demonstrable in the lack of preparedness in numerous crises — not just this coronavirus. And when it comes to logic and reason, objective evaluation is what matters.

Is it logical to expect quick deployments and resolutions when, as only a mild exaggeration, it takes 37 layers of approvals and nine months to unlock a door latch? Spock(ette) says: no. Highly illogical. We see it over, and over, and over, from slow hurricane response, to days/weeks wait for Federal deployment on wildfires, to the CDC bungling of this virus disaster, to weekly politicization of nonpartisan issues.

Yet I see so many people demanding more involvement of the very same thing that keeps failing, over and over and over: Federal “help”! That’s not only illogical, but irrational, unhealthy, toxic! And also: Sisyphean.

Second: Disasters really are local. This is because individuals are affected.

States (especially for their resource/economically poor rural areas) and major cities need to learn to prepare as if they essentially will get zero help from above in a timely way. Quite often, after all, that’s the brutally honest truth. This way, if help does arrive, it’s a bonus, a relief.

Dependency on big, inefficient, untimely, unreliable Washington is really a form of unhealthy codependency — akin to a neglectful, often gaslighting, sometimes abusive personal relationship, but wrought on a broad scale.

Think about this, please. Relate to it. Would you tell your friend in such a relationship to stay the course, stick it out, trust the abuser/neglector will somehow, someday reform? If you have been in such a relationship personally, you will get what I’m saying. Why encourage such relationships of cities, counties and states with Washington, who has and will let them down, gaslight, neglect, attach strings, token-“help”, or even trample them as often as fully assist?

Abusive relationships don’t just arise from individuals, but also…see encircled. The question isn’t which of these federal government has done at some point or another, but which it *hasn’t*! It’s not hard to find historic examples of every pie piece above.

If you still don’t understand the concept of betrayal by centralized DC bureaucracy, and how systemically destructive that can be, ask our native American Indian tribes.

Exactly as we correctly advise friends in toxic relationships, states and cities need to learn to get out of that bad relationship with Washington and go it on their own, with years to decades of advanced planning for every sort of disaster that could befall them. Spock(ette) would see this through the lens of history and say, “That’s imminently logical.”

Recent events and discussions with others indicate that I ought to explain something for the sake of helping others to understand. I’ll point to this piece when needed in the future, in order to be time-efficient and avoid redundancy.

Growing up in the inner city, I learned early and almost innately the meaning of “watch your back” — trust must be earned, not just given. Mostly I still think that way. Been there, done that, seen it all…I’ve witnessed too much betrayal, dishonesty and backstabbing, too many mind games and control tactics and manipulation attempts in multiple settings (including being targeted with all of the above in an important past relationship), and it reinforces the notion.

This is not a cynical or bitter existence either. My trust wall is so automatic anymore that I give it little conscious thought. In fact, I live a quite happy life in a great marriage with one of the very few people on Earth whom I ever have had reason to trust completely and unconditionally. She is so genuine and real that I trust her far more than I trust myself (again, simply because I have seen too much). That’s rare, and a blessing.

I also trust my Lord unconditionally and without reservation; after all, God is perfect, all-knowing, and all-caring. He has guided me through many tough situations after thoughtful and deliberate prayer (which does work…best if your expectations aren’t selfish or short-term in nature). What I do not trust is our broken and sinful world, and most people in it. I love my fellow people fundamentally as humans, and have helped and will help strangers in need as I see appropriate situationally. However, strangers’ and acquaintances’ intentions and motivations being largely unknown, and human nature being inherently sinful, trust is another story. Want me to trust you? Well, I used to live in Missouri, so “show me” that you are trustworthy. It can be done and takes three things: time, authenticity and integrity. [Notice I did not say “perfection”, for that is impossible in a human. However, my standards are very high.] Simple, but not easy!

The positive to this level of understanding of people is that I don’t get taken advantage of; I can effortlessly spot a scam or detect shysters, call them out without inhibition, and alert others who are more gullible to prevent their being taken for fools by such people and situations. It serves one quite well in many situations (personal investment, choosing charity, scam avoidance, BS detection, advising friends, etc.). This has prevented a lot of trouble, both for self and others. In those regards I am blessed.

The flip side: Outside of a very few trusted friends and colleagues, people generally are kept at arm’s length or longer, and in specific compartments or ladder levels of trust. This is just who I am. I fully admit this, and you just have to deal with it, if you want my friendship or favor. I am quite secure in my own skin, and don’t need any particular relationship to validate my well-being or self-respect. Therefore: if investing in earning my trust is too much trouble for you: not my problem…see ya! [One other thing you need to know is I am brutally honest, which you can see readily by reading previous BLOG entries going back a decade.]

See, I have to conscientiously, actively force myself to trust, to take risks in people, in any sort of relationship (personal or professional). Again, it’s not cynical or bitter at all…it just is. This is a different perspective of origin than most, but I’m completely at peace with it. If you are too, we’ll get along fine on whatever level of balance we shall reach.

This also ties in with my personal Facebook policy, which is part (but not all) of what motivates this entry. I post personal things there at times, though I am very measured and deliberate about what, and am careful not to reveal too much. My Facebook wall is not a democracy; what happens there is entirely on my terms, and at my discretion. Even still, I only accept “friend” requests from people I already know or who come highly recommended by mutual friends. If I ignore a request, it’s nothing personal against the requester. I just don’t know you well enough…simple as that.

Governmental Dependency as a Toxic Relationship

On Trust