I was mulling around the Brown Bookstore in Providence and came across a book titled, “Ascent of the A-Word: Assholism, the First Sixty Years” by Geoffrey Nunberg. Nunberg is a linguist and former chair of the Usage Panel of the American Heritage Dictionary.
Nunberg explains that because the a-word is so often used in an emotionally charged burst,
“for that very reason, (it has) — it turns out — precise meaning, and… reflects our genuine attitudes, rather than what we think our attitudes should be.”
Arsehole: a British or Australian vulgarity, the American variant is Asshole. The word is mainly used generally to describe people who are viewed as incompetent or detestable.
Arsehole is not a synonym for “jerk.” A jerk can be lovable; a jerk is not as self-consumed as an arsehole.
The word’s roots can be traced back 1500 years and more to the Old English word for “rump,” and earlier still to the Germanic ars (buttock). It has cousins in ancient middle eastern languages.
The political connection
I’ll use the Brit version (arse): it seems less vulgar and we will be discussing elected officials …some of whom we refer to as “honorable.”
Yes, the political scene has gotten pretty vulgar. Some of these elected “honorables” even attempt to use their positions as an avenue of access for a few entitled supporters, rather than as a boulevard for the masses. Yes, sometimes it is proper to be vulgar.
It is written somewhere in the laws of probability that whenever there are 100 humans gathered in any group, that there will be 3.7 certified arseholes in that gathering.
The exceptions are for groups of politicians and car salespeople, where the numbers are much higher. These 3.7 certified jerks will make more noise and cause more disharmony, confusion, discomfort and heartburn than the other 96.3 humans combined.
Why do they do it?
The typical arsehole thrives on situations where they have little or nothing to lose and their antagonist has everything to lose. They prefer an “I win — you lose” situation to a “win-win” one. They love being “the man.”
Think Donald Trump (perhaps the prototypical arsehole) in “The Apprentice.” He is in
the power position, he’s the man. Arseholes live for that.
We know who the certified ones are. Often they are bosses. Certifieds love the “boss” title for the same reasons: situations where they have nothing to lose and the other person does. “Do this or you don’t get a bonus…” Like elected office, the boss position offers great opportunities to hone arsehole skills.
Why do arseholes flock to politics?
An arsehole is almost always a gifted person with more than a modicum of physical attractiveness, intelligence and personal grace. They should be grateful, but these gifts have led them to feel superior and entitled. Their natural inclination is to gravitate to situations that validate those feelings. Yes, politics is a natural for them.
During the late 80’s and 90’s, in business, there was a move to make leaders more “emotionally intelligent.” Arseholes are very sensitive to feelings, but it’s their own feelings and not anyone else’s that they are sensitive to. Many of them couldn’t deal with this “emotional intelligence” thing that business was pushing on them. Lots of them changed their business focus to politics.
A Caveat
By far, the great majority of politicians aren’t arseholes, but a great amount of media time is dedicated to arsehole politicians. These folks know how to garner attention, and of course a lot of people are likely to assume that the whole flock is of the same feather.
Fear, Anger, Vulgarity
I think that it’s safe to say that the current arsehole rate in Washington is higher than 3.7%. There is a lot of fear mongering going on. Fear generates anger. Anger smothers reason. Once reason gets smothered, it becomes pretty easy to influence voters.
It’s difficult to differentiate a lie from the truth when there seems to be so much of the former and the liars getting so much media attention and creating more confusion about who is deliberately confusing the issues… Somewhere in the jumble are some truths, but good luck finding them.
Parliamentary Compromise
I lived in Canada for a few years. They have a parliamentary version of democratic government. Rather than have an elected President, they have a Prime Minister who is the leader of the party that wins a majority of seats in the Parliament. If we had their system of government, John Boehner would be the Prime Minister (President). (ed note — that was in 2012, now Paul Ryan would get the call)
Their system also differs in that it is made up of six or seven different political parties. If no one party wins 50% of the seats, then the Prime Minister job is up for grabs.
The top parties make concessions with the smaller contingents until they get enough votes to back a Prime Minister. If a compromise can’t be reached, an untimely election can result. There is great pressure on the major parties to compromise with lesser parties to resolve differences and win majorities.
One-Party Blockade
In the U.S., we have a two party system. This system has served us well, but we are at a fork in the road. The Republicans, who lost the presidency in 2008, but won a majority in the House of Representatives in 2010, have effectively emulated parliamentary style politics and blocked most of the legislation that the President and the Democrats have tried to pass.
When they can’t block with votes, they use the filibuster.
With the way that our two-party government works, a parliamentary block pretty much renders the government dysfunctional (for example, no federal budget).
It also creates a very dangerous precedent. If the Democrats lose the Presidency and win the House or Senate, and if they decide to retaliate and do a similar block, then sooner or later things are going to come to a screeching halt.
Our system of government depends on the two sides having serious discussions and arriving at compromises. This hasn’t been happening.
Congressional gridlock has become the rule, not the exception.
Some congressional figures flourish in this type of “I-win-you lose” situation. “Cooperation” is not in their vocabulary. When these politicians explain the gridlock to the voters they lie about it, point fingers in the other direction, and invariably, they paint a confusing and emotionally charged picture that first induces fear; then anger.
Reason gets smothered by fear and anger and in the confusion, arseholes get elected and re-elected to the power seats.
Like good marketing people, politicians are good at manipulating perception. In political elections perception is reality.
A former President once said that, “Democracy is an honorable enterprise that advances the public interest. It’s not a blood sport.”
Both parties have more than their fair share of arseholes. Both sides will use the fear, anger and confusion tactics. During this election, regardless of what side that you are on, when you feel that emotional charge in your gut…recognize that you are falling into an arsehole trap. Step out of it.
Your brain has more reasoning power than your gut does. Take stock of what is reasonable, qualify what you are feeling in your gut, and then make your decision.
It’s impossible to remove all of the arseholes. It is our duty though, to elect reasonable, somewhat cooperative people to positions of power. Perhaps we can get that rate to below 10% and get our system of governing back on track.
Leave your thoughts on the subject on www.coastalmags.com or send them to editor@coastalmags.com.
Tags
Paul LetendrePolitics & Activismculture
September 26, 2012
