Simply Politics and News

[trkyhntr]

good morning, K2.
It is interesting that many changes in society have come about with very little scientific evidence to indicate that the change would be good for society. For example, during the radical 60s and 70s, we were told that if we just spent enough money, we could eliminate poverty. While in theory, this could be true (if we simply give everyone enough money so that by definition they are not poor), in practice it simply made the problem worse. After three generations, we are now trying to wean a whole segment of our population off of welfare.
A second interesting change was the abolishment of corporal punishment (spanking). During the 60s, Dr. Benjamin Spock put forth the hypothesis that spanking would lead to more violent behavior on the part of children, and was not an acceptable form of discipline. It is very interesting to note that there have been no hard scientific studies done to prove that hypothesis, and yet it is now accepted by many as fact. The alternative methods of keeping children in line (discipline) are innefectual at best and harmful at worst, but the psychological community stubbornly clings to a failed hypothesis. I did extensive research into this back in the 1980s, and revisited the topic recently, and the only studies I could find that indicated spanking was bad for children (when not administered in a way that was abusive) were annecdotal. Even Dr. Spock recanted in the last edition of his book, stating that he had been in error, and that spanking could be a good tool to use in setting limits to behavior, but the damage had been done.
I find a third thing most interesting, that being the proliferation of gratuitous and graphic violence and sexual behavior on television and in the movies, and in video games more recently. On the one hand, we are told by those industries that this has no effect upon children's behavior. At the same time, they get millions for a few seconds time for a commercial during the super bowl, stating that advertising can influence behavior (sell a product). Clint Eastwood beats the absolute hell out of crooks and shoots more than a few and is in favor of gun control. Anthony Hopkins cuts the face off a guard and plasters it on his own and uses the tactic to escape from prison, but states that he is non-violent. Mary Tyler Moore campaigns in favor of animal rights, and tells us that we should all be vegetarians. We in society have come to think that just because an actor or actress is beautiful and makes a million or more for a picture that they actually know something. We even elect them to offices, including the presidency of the USA.
Top this all off with the current ruling class we have sent to Washington, and I am somewhat distressed for the future prospects for our way of life. The framers of our form of government didn't in their wildest dreams, envision a government composed of professional politicians. In fact, they were trying to create a form of government that would replace the royalty and ruling class structure of Europe, but what do we have now? I submit that we have a ruling class, influenced mainly by money, and then there are the rest of us.
Sorry to rant so.
trkyhntr