Shikaka!

21+

Fulton Greenwall: The chief says that unless the sacred bat is returned before the marriage of the princess, the Wachati tribe will meet their death.

Ace Ventura: What type of bat are we talking about?

Fulton Greenwall: The great white bat, of course.

Ace Ventura: Crepuscular Chiroptera?

Fulton Greenwall: Yes. But to the natives: Shikaka!

Ace Ventura: Shikaka. SHEEKKAAKAHH. Shikasha! Uh…shishkebab…Shawshank Redemption…Chicaaago! Alright, you’re out of there. Go on, you’re gone.

Ace Venture: When Nature Calls (1995)

Back before Jim Carrey completed his transition into a slightly unhinged version of my grandmother, he really was very funny – one of our country’s better physical/slapstick comedians. It’s a tremendously difficult style to pull off as long as Carrey, Benny Hill and Jerry Lewis were able. The short shelf life isn’t really a hazard of the trade, although Belushi and Farley did both die from drug overdoses (of the same drug, as it happens) in their prime. The more typical problem is that slapstick must adapt more quickly than other forms of humor if it is to stay fresh. It shocks, it sparkles, and then it bores.

The Ace Ventura movies haven’t aged especially well in this regard. If you didn’t watch them at the time, and perhaps if you weren’t the 13-year old demographic for whom they reached their nirvana, you’ll struggle through them today. But for the modern political observer, they have everything: symbols! Opposing factions exploiting those symbols! Sophisticated outsiders expertly manipulating those symbols to create conflict! A man literally talking out of his ass!

In the last two weeks, US political observers will have seen the powerful emergence of two great white bats. Both have the dog whistle and obedience collar features Ben discussed in his classic note, Always Go to the Funeral, and the rage and mirroring engagements in A Game of You. Both issues are almost completely without substance.

So of course both are just about the only things anyone wants to talk about.

I’m talking, of course, about The Wall and the 70% Tax.

The fundamental substance of The Wall as an issue – the reality – is really quite boring. Border fences and walls are not uncommon. They are not inherently hateful. They are also not particularly effective. Border control is pretty clearly within the mandate of the government, so there’s not much jurisdictional debate. There are no data indicating much change, or any new crisis in illegal immigration, except data that would indicate a decline. There does appear to be a sharp rise in asylum cases and a lack of resources to handle them, but that is a different issue. The cost of a wall is meaningful, but a rounding error in context of the federal budget. In short, it’s a fringe issue that should be consigned to policy wonks.

The fundamental substance of a 70% Marginal Tax as an issue – the reality – is similarly boring. It won’t raise much new revenue. It really won’t change the effective tax rate of almost anyone, since it will just cause the creation of new deductions and loopholes and exceptions, as such tax rates have since the beginning of time. There’s reason for concern in that the wealthy are not equally well-equipped to access such loopholes, which ironically means that the plan would have little impact on well-entrenched asset owners and more impact on lower asset, higher income creators of new wealth. The net effect of all this is that it would have practically no impact on income inequality. Still, in substance, this is an issue for tax and budget wonks.

Except it isn’t the wall. It’s a meme of The Wall! It isn’t a proposal of a higher marginal tax rate. It’s a meme of The 70% Tax! Each is a symbol meant as obedience collar for its native audience and as provocative dog whistle for the opposition.  

To a Trump-supporting conservative, The Wall! is an obedience collar and an opportunity for mirroring engagement. It stands for a willingness to defend our borders and the integrity of our nation in the way prior presidents have not been willing. It stands for a commitment to the rule of law and enforcement of existing statutes. It stands for putting the interests of tax-paying American citizens first. And yes, for some it stands for keeping a (white) America from changing too quickly. But more than anything, it stands for standing by Trump in the face of constant opposition from the media and opposing politicians who just want to see him lose at any cost.

To the Trump opponent, The Wall! is a rage engagement. It stands for white nationalism and nativism. It stands for hatred and mistrust of foreigners, and an abdication of America’s founding principles. It stands for unjust anti-immigrant policy and sentiment more broadly. Most importantly, it stands for Trump, and the one thing he said most confidently and frequently that he would do during his presidency.

Now, a wall isn’t really any of those things. It’s some cement bound together with more cement and water, or in this case, it’s a row of steel slats, I guess. They’re really normal and boring things for countries to build that cost a bit of money, don’t hurt anybody, and don’t work very well. The abstractions from this boring reality are not inherent features of it, except inasmuch as some topics inherently permit memes to be more easily conjured. They are constructs of the widening gyre of our politics.  

Same with the 70% Tax! meme. To the progressive, especially one looking to move our society much further left, it stands for a willingness to finally do something about wealth inequality. It stands for the belief that the poorest in our society shouldn’t be struggling to get by while the wealthiest select new layouts for the galley in their yacht. It stands for workers. It stands for single parents. It stands for funding the policies and programs that would support them. It stands for equality and fairness. And yes, to some, it stands for sticking it to some rich people we don’t especially like.

To the opposition, the 70% Tax! meme is about encroaching influence of central planners and socialists. It is about those who would take economic freedom from us to implement their own idealized view of the world. It is about institutionalized hatred of the rich and successful. It is about crippling economic growth, creativity and the entrepreneurial spirit in favor of making everyone poorer, if more equal.

Except it isn’t really either of those things. It’s a policy that isn’t going to happen. Even if by some miracle/nightmare it did, it’s a marginal tax that doesn’t raise much money, which after new and existing deductions probably won’t end up costing rich people anything, which won’t fund a single program, which won’t stop a single new venture from being formed, and which won’t change a thing about wealth inequality.

Like The Wall!, the 70% Tax! is an abstraction and a symbol. It is important to realize, even if you care about the underlying issue, that the debate isn’t about the thing. It’s about the abstraction, about all the things that we are being told that each policy supposedly stands for. Those things will feel very real to us, because that’s what the widening gyre does to our brains. It drives us toward the beacon of Good and Right Policy and away from the cesspool of Evil and Wrong-Headed Policy.

What to do?

Clear Eyes. Mind how our side’s obedience collars are calling us to the defense of principles not really under attack. See how the other side playfully shouts “Shikaka!” to raise our hackles and diminish us. Be honest about whether some of the abstractions we find ourselves attracted to are, in fact, unjust or hateful.

Full Hearts. Be patient with those who attribute the foul features of the abstractions they have created to us. Be longsuffering in defending our intent, and believing the intents of others.

And God willing, when politicians and other missionaries start talking out of their ass and driving us into the widening gyre by promoting these abstractions, we stop voting for them.

21+

8
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Peter Sherman
Member
Peter Sherman

Appreciate the reminder Rusty !
Too easy to fall into that trap
Clear Eyes, Full Heart

1+
Mike S
Member
Mike S

“Each is a symbol meant as obedience collar for its native audience and as provocative dog whistle for the opposition.”

So much goodness here and so many lessons…reminds me of a note I have been saving.

2019 will be a pivot for society, its not about inflation, growth or markets but it will effect everything…its not the apocalypse or a revolution it just emerges…

The Long Night is Coming

Written by an anonymous friend who also senses the arrival of the long night of networked tyranny:

“Today is the final day of 2018. As years go, it was adequate to its purpose, which was delivering us in one complete orbit about the Sun. Enough with retrospectives: let us understand what is coming in 2019.

The coming year will be an exceptionally difficult one for the republic, perhaps even uniquely so. Two major streams of events will at their confluence yield extraordinary outcomes: the advent of the 2020 Presidential-campaign cycle, and the nearly inevitable impeachment of the President by the now-incoming Democratic House. (Impeachment by the House will likely succeed, conviction-and-removal by the Senate will likely fail.) The mechanisms of it all will yield imperatives for maximal behavior by all parties. It will become impossible to compromise without communicating fatal weakness to the other side, impossible to retreat without being immolated by your own.
Imagine, if you will, the momentary hysteria of the Kavanaugh nomination — momentary because its principal perpetrators did not actually believe their own proximate case — revived and extended into a permanent state, with a real sense of existential threat animating all participants. That is our probable 2019.

This doesn’t stay inside the Beltway. This means heightened ideological conflict as a permanent feature of ordinary American life. We haven’t seen much of this before — the strife of the 1960s and 1970s being fairly localized in many ways, and that of the 1860s being mostly regionalized — with one major exception. That exception is the American Revolution itself, when neighbors really did turn upon one another in the name of political theory in a process more brutal and merciless than popular memory recalls. Even that, though, is not wholly the template for now, because there does not seem to be much by way of partisans for liberty in 2019. More apt, probably, is the example of France with its own tradition of ideological self-terrorization, devoid of any good guys, whether in 1792-1794, 1870-1871, or 1958-1962.

In our lifetimes, the single most significant threat to the life, liberty, and property of the average American citizen has always been the federal government. The danger in 2019 is that a consequence of that federal government’s crescendoing dysfunction will be the replacement of that most significant threat with one far more grave, far more vicious, and far more relentless: our own neighbors.

The perfected expression of democratic society is, after all, Twitter.

This is the probable 2019 and you should prepare for it. In times past one avenue of preparation and protection was withdrawal. That avenue is closed. There is no retreat, no refuge in federalism or community; no “Benedict option.” We have made our public square inescapable and pervasive — we even have electronic 大字报, although we generally lack the wit or perspective to grasp what that implies. Preparation therefore isn’t the seeking of the safe harbor. Nor is it the girding for combat and surrender to the awful machinery of mass democracy at its lowest point. Let the fanatics do that: there is no victory in their game.

The only preparation that matters is in conducting yourself and your family as if it were another era entirely. You cannot change what 2019 will probably be. You can, though, be an example in memory and history when the time comes to rebuild.” –John Robb, Global Guerrillas report

***The tyranny of Dataism…Marshall McLuhan, drawing on the work of Teilhard de Chardin, argued that the technological changes of the last few centuries were propelling us, by changing how we think and interrelate with each other, towards a globally integrated system. Teilhard called it a noosphere, a global mind/consciousness. McLuhan called it a global village.

Clear Eyes and Full Hearts by Ben Hunt and Rusty Guinn is not just a way of thinking and seeing the world for what it really is or a pack…its more than that…its an open-source insurgency and you better start thinking that way…towards a balance system of new feedback loops, data privacy and open decision making! Zeitgeist…I hope its wrong, TBD

4+
Ian VanReepinghen
Member
Ian VanReepinghen

Thank you for this — I have been puzzled why start with something so controversial as 70% tax rate that doesn’t do anything anyway. But you’re right! So why does no one start a Meme called “Ban Lobbying!”?

1+
LudwigvonMises
Member
LudwigvonMises

Good points on the memeology, but the history of the 70s and 80s suggest that going back to a high marginal rate tax policy actually will suppress economic growth, economic growth, and entrepreneurial spirit, if only by providing economic incentives for expending resources on tax avoidance schemes. While the 70% proposal itself is probably going nowhere, that 70s mindset appears to be trying to make a comeback (including the renewed fascination of the young with communism and statism).

The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.

0
Mike S
Member
Mike S

Had to post these thoughts, as they are so relevant and current…

IF you want to see how something goes “Viral” and turns into “Zeitgeist,” then look no further….it’s coming to America….The Long Night will arrive here too….

What are the abstractions here??? TBD

The UK is in the midst of a legitimacy crisis. Reader David summed it up well:

…. can I suggest that non-UK (and non-European) readers pay attention over the next week or so, at least? You’re about to see the unfolding of a political crisis the like of which happens in the Western world once a generation, if that. The combination of an essentially insoluble problem, an incompetent government, an enfeebled civil service, a bitterly divided political system, and government by convention and precedent rather than constitution, has produced a situation in which almost any outcome, including the most extreme, is possible. The effects on the British political system (and whether, indeed, it survives at all) are the real issue here, not Brexit, no matter how important that objectively is. Whilst I think the “sleepwalking” idea from the Grauniad is overstated, a more dangerous, related, worry is that Britain has had hundreds of years of political stability, and people assume that such stability (itself preceded by violence and revolution) will just go on forever. It may, but it also might not. And whereas in France, Spain or Germany, say, violent changes of political system are understood and lived with, that’s not the case in Britain.

If you think Trumpology ends with Trump leaving, it is just the beginning…this is just the buildup until it is selected-out as in evolution thru a systemic change!

1+

Disclosures

This commentary is being provided to you as general information only and should not be taken as investment advice. The opinions expressed in these materials represent the personal views of the author(s). It is not investment research or a research recommendation, as it does not constitute substantive research or analysis. Any action that you take as a result of information contained in this document is ultimately your responsibility. Epsilon Theory will not accept liability for any loss or damage, including without limitation to any loss of profit, which may arise directly or indirectly from use of or reliance on such information. Consult your investment advisor before making any investment decisions. It must be noted, that no one can accurately predict the future of the market with certainty or guarantee future investment performance. Past performance is not a guarantee of future results.

Statements in this communication are forward-looking statements.

The forward-looking statements and other views expressed herein are as of the date of this publication. Actual future results or occurrences may differ significantly from those anticipated in any forward-looking statements, and there is no guarantee that any predictions will come to pass. The views expressed herein are subject to change at any time, due to numerous market and other factors. Epsilon Theory disclaims any obligation to update publicly or revise any forward-looking statements or views expressed herein.

This information is neither an offer to sell nor a solicitation of any offer to buy any securities.

This commentary has been prepared without regard to the individual financial circumstances and objectives of persons who receive it. Epsilon Theory recommends that investors independently evaluate particular investments and strategies, and encourages investors to seek the advice of a financial advisor. The appropriateness of a particular investment or strategy will depend on an investor’s individual circumstances and objectives.