Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The Tyranny of the Immediate
Ajax taking Cassandra, c. 440-430 BC.
Perhaps one of my best and (by me) most underappreciated teachers in high school was my sophomore English teacher. Mr. Hill offered methods of studying English and other things in ways that I was too cocky and short-sighted to appreciate. I suspect if I adopted at least half of his studying and thinking methods then, I would have done much better in college.
One of the earliest lessons I do remember from him was the concept of consequences over time. For that he had a scale. It more or less broke down like this:
- Immediate Term: 0 to 6 months.
- Very Short Term: 6 months to 10 years.
- Short Term: 10 to 50 years.
- Mid-term: 50 to 100 years
- Long Term: 100 to 500 years
- Very Long Term: 500 to 1,000 years
- Extended Term: 1,000+ years
As an American sophomore on the West Coast, I didn’t quite wrap my head around that length of time. Oregon wasn’t quite 150 years old. I wasn’t old enough to drive a car. To consider something other than what he labeled “short term” was at that time inconceivable. I couldn’t even wrap my head around mid-term let alone anything longer. However, it was a concept that stuck with me, perhaps because of its ability to blow my young mind away.
The value of such a way of thinking is apparent now. It’s important to view an action with an idea of its possible consequences and after effects. The value of foresight is paramount in decision making. In fact, I can attribute my lack of thinking beyond the immediate to be a major contributor to my difficulties in college. The university is not an ideal place to pick up study habits one has failed to develop prior.
We now live in an age where hindsight is massive. Entire libraries exist online in ways that might make those who had seen the Great Library of Alexandria gape in wide-eyed amazement. Past is prologue, and by seeing where we have been and considering where we are now, we can posit where we might go in the future if we follow a certain path.
But that has not happened in the last decade, if not last several. We have existed in a political, social, and cultural realm where the immediate urgencies take precedence over the possible consequences on any scale of time. Warnings of any consequences are dismissed out of hand as slippery slope arguments as if no one ever invented the playground slide. Instead, each immediate urgency must be dealt with as if it was an island unto itself with no effect on the world around us.
Obama famously mocked critics of the ACA the day after it was signed. He joked about conservative panic but, lo and behold, the next day we all got up, the sun was shining, and civilization was still there. Never mind that the consequences of this act were years down the road, we were urged to mock the critics because nothing happened the next day.
Same-sex marriage opponents were mocked for worrying about potential consequences to freedom of association and religion should progressives succeed. After the Supreme Court ruled in favor, again critics were mocked because the US hadn’t gone up in flames by the next day. Never mind that even months later both those freedoms were under severe assault, but we were to ignore these concerns. The same tactics are being used with transgender issues, mocking those with concerns beyond the immediate.
Human beings in general frequently lack long-term vision, thus those precious few who have the vision to see clearly ahead, to see the ill and good from a specific path, should be valued. But in the pursuit of power, we’ve begun to ignore those voices, then finally mock them. We’ve created a plethora of Cassandras and Jeremiahs, always speaking the truth of what’s to come, but always ignored because what’s said is disagreeable to the listener.
What is more distressing to me is that it is our present leaders who are sitting in the seats of the scornful now. Leaders with the wisdom to recognize and listen to those with vision are lacking. They’ve blinded themselves, taken our hands, and are leading us all straight to the pit, assuring us that the way is perfectly safe and clear.
We need vision and foresight now more than ever, but how we can convince a society that has mocked such things as inconvenient that this is important? I’m at a loss.
Published in General
The moral of the story: Always listen to guys named Hill.
I wonder to what extend a short-term focus is related to lower birthrates, later childbearing, and more widespread childlessness. Without children and grandchildren, it’s difficult to care much about the future — and vice versa.
And without being able to imagine oneself as old and lonely and wanting descendants to have a legacy, child rearing looks very unattractive in comparison to childlessness.
I can see the truth in that. Consider as well how much culture treats children as the end to an individual’s future. They are a limiter; you can’t do all that you would without a child. But appeals to that future are appeals to the immediate. “Don’t stop doing what you want to do now!”
It’s hard to imagine a democracy planning as far ahead as your teacher’s “mid term” designation, except in the most vague and general terms.
The longest possible foresight in our system is the expected incumbency of the current crop of elected officials. As long as things don’t crash while they are in office, it’s all good. If things crumble the day after they leave, that just shows how wonderful they were.
It is. It reminds me some of Plato’s Republic as he discusses the weaknesses of various governments, and how democracy is so close to tyranny.
Most Ricochetti are over the Hill already.
In every possible understanding of the word “over.”
This explains, as well as anything can, the mission creep that Social Security underwent from its inception to the current day.
None of the perpetrators were concerned when they larded it up, because Keynes nailed it: in the long run, we’re all dead.
What’s remarkable to me is that at least those were guilty of very short term thinking. Today we aren’t even expected to look beyond a few days. It’s almost entirely in the now. Looking a few months, let alone years, is politically unthinkable.
This advice might be more relevant to politics than to personal decisions. In reflections on Mother Angelica, a central theme was her deliberate focus on the present moment and how that faith in God’s provisions was frequently rewarded. Many people have stories about receiving exactly what they need exactly when they needed it, apart from their attempts to plan for the future. Many well-devised plans fail due to unforeseeable circumstances.
Or perhaps politics can indeed operate along similar principles. As one may avoid personal debts for reasons other than fear of insufficient funds in the future, voters may demand a balanced budget for moral rather than economic reasons.
This isn’t an argument for anything; just food for thought.
I really like this. Thanks for sharing your teacher’s time scale, and adding your insights to it. Two things in response:
Definitely agree on #2, but that should be the best argument against the government trying to do most things, and why with the things they must do, they should stick to setting basic rules and nothing more.
On the other hand, my main complaint about Paul Ryan’s plan to tackle entitlement spending is that it relies on a decade or more of unbroken Republican domination. A political strategy shouldn’t depend heavily on resources one is unlikely to possess.
Then again, that criticism flies in the face of my comment regarding Mother Angelica, who regularly bet on unlikely resources and yet succeeded by the grace of God. Perhaps in politics too it is right to rely on hope.
As Judge Mental notes, that probably is the best argument for leaving the federal government with a light touch. Projecting out ten years is folly at best when any number of those in your camp could be voted out in two years.
Aaron: That’s good to consider when making plans. I hope to suggest that we can’t plan so much as consider our actions and their consequences in longer term. Not quite the same thing, but closely related I think.
Oh, but faith in God’s provision is the quintessential Extended Term. That’s the eternal view! ;-)
Aaron Miller:
I’ve given some thought, but a good example of the principle you’re discussing here is the current socio-political push against climate change*. There we have two basic conceits disguised as foresight:
Much of the argument for this is placed in terms of long and very long term thinking with little regard for economic effects in shorter terms. In fact, the conceit of number 2 makes it worse.
*I’m giving the benefit of the doubt on this. For some this is indeed an issue to further government control, but for many the acceptance of 1 and 2 are well-intended (but for us on a rather familiar road paved with those well-intentions …)
True for propane and propane accessories. Must be something to it.
He’s a what?
He’s a music man.
We aren’t allowed to remember anything longer ago than a few days either. Hillary has been playing up all of her foreign policy “experience” of late because, at this point, what difference does the past make?
The important part of the long term isn’t so much the future which will never be knowable, but the past and the immediate. It is, as Burke and Adams both said a contract between past, present and future generations. It’s also biblical, we can’t change the past, we can’t know the future, but if we live today well, following god’s law, the future will take care of itself. God’s law Burke referred to as the proscriptions, prescriptions and prejudices past generations passed on to us in our institutions, culture, religions etc. Adams called it virtue. So when we say we’ve lost our virtue it means we’ve broken that contract, severed ourselves from the bank of “nations and of ages”. Indeed we have.
The rise of Bernie is attributable to our very short memories. Most of the kids in his camp have no idea what socialism really is or where it came from.
Great post.
I read someone somewhere (Stephen Covey?) who talked about our daily lives, and the tyranny of the “urgent” over the “important.”
And I’ve had something in the back of my mind about that, and about conservative priorities, and about — among other things — education.
It’s a post I’ve been meaning to write myself. But I haven’t had time — as I didn’t have time to comment properly on this one — because in my own life, just at the moment, I am very much swamped by the “immediate.”
Reminds me of King Hezekiah (see Isaiah 39:6-8). The king was just told his kingdom would be overrun by Babylonians after he was dead because he showed the treasures in the Temple. His reply was basically, “Great! Peace in my time!” That’s our nation’s leadership, “At least it won’t collapse while I’m in office. My legacy is safe.” God help us.