Eye Off the Ball
An exceedingly common refrain when criticizing the invasion of Iraq is that “we took our eye off the ball” (the Taliban in Afghanistan). A web headline on The Washington Post’s site today is “Eye On The Ball, America.” It’s about the Mideast peace process.
Are we so stupid that we are incapable of talking about foreign policy without using sports metaphors? It’s not even a smart sports metaphor. “Keep your eye on the ball” is what Little League coaches yell at eight-year-olds who are too distracted by that dog licking himself on the sideline to pay attention. It’s a miracle President Bush said “Mission Accomplished” in 2003 rather than “Touchdown!”
This isn’t an idle point. Language both reflects and influences our thought processes. Our thoughts can only be as complex as the words we use to utter them. When politicians say, “We gotta get the bad guys,” do you know what they’re thinking? It’s not, “We need to judiciously marshal our resources to target radical Islamic fundamentalists that wish to harm us without inflaming the world and creating a bigger problem than what we started with.” The thought is, “We gotta get the bad guys.” Or perhaps even “Bad guys bad” if they are getting linguistic help from a teleprompter.
A large part of the reason political discussions are so simple-minded and devoid of substance is because of the language politicians use. Is “Pullout now / We can’t surrender” any different from “Tastes great / Less filling”? By the time a complex discussion gets hacked by television media into 15 second sound bites and repeated ad nauseam on 24-hour cable networks or by ideologues on political talk shows or radio, it doesn’t resemble a discussion anymore. It’s just sloganeering, and the small percentage of people trying to think independently and evaluate the available information wonder why they have so much trouble doing so.
I don’t know how much to blame politicians for this. When they say something nuanced, their words get twisted and distorted by their opponents. If it’s not a snappy sound bite, news networks will prune qualifications and conditions from the original statement until it becomes one. And that what gets remembered. There is something about human psychology that makes us receptive to short, simple messages (see: Basis For All of Advertising). It’s a shame few politicians point this out and at least try to raise the level of discourse.
meghan said,
March 6, 2008 @ 2:03 pm
awesome post, Jason. Let’s talk about this at home!! It’s interesting, and … well, complicated. I think you’re right - human psychology is responsible - and plays a major part in what we’ll sit and watch or read or listen to. There are more complicated narratives and discussions out there, if we choose to listen to or read them, but it takes time and concentration. Which we humans do have *some* of, but we need to focus it on what we find important and enriching to our own individual lives. Politics isn’t everyone’s top priority or interest… I dunno, just some thoughts. Let’s have a beer and discuss.