The Cult of the Amateur

Published by

Clarissa

September 20, 2015

In the soporific news of the month, the painfully boring discussions of whether Fiorina was a good CEO keep raging on.

The point of these debates eludes me entirely. Let’s say she was the best CEO known to humanity. So what? How would that make her more qualified to perform an entirely different set of duties?

By participating in the debates as to whether Fiorina was a good CEO or Carson a good doctor, we are allowing the congenitally stupid among our compatriots to define the terms of discussion and colonize the public space. We are letting the most lost and confused among us have an impact that they do not deserve to have.

The problem with Fiorina, Trump and Carson is not how well or how badly they performed in their professions. The problem is that, politically, they are rank, arrogant amateurs who can only appeal to those who are too intellectually limited to understand the complexities of the modern world.

Remember, the moment you let somebody else define the terms of the conversation, you are halfway down the road to losing.

Rate this:

14 responses to “The Cult of the Amateur”

Dreidel

September 20, 2015

“…politically, they are rank, arrogant amateurs.”

Well, how would you describe a one-term senator from Illinois who actually managed to get elected President twice, and is now playing commander-in-chief of the Free Word while it crumbles into rubble in his incompetent hands?

LikeLike

Reply
1. Clarissa
  
  September 20, 2015
  
  A career politician, what else? Obama is bored with foreign affairs, that’s a fact. But he took a collapsing economy and turned it around very fast and very effectively. That’s a huge achievement. Nobody else among the world leaders managed to do that with this global economic crisis except for Canada’s Harper.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  1. Dreidel
    
    September 20, 2015
    
    If the economy is doing so well, why is Wall Street in a panic? Have you checked the Dow Jones average lately?
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
    1. Clarissa
      
      September 20, 2015
      
      I have checked my bank account, and compared with 2009 it’s doing amazing. 🙂
      
      LikeLike
      
      Reply
    2. The Dark Avenger
      
      September 21, 2015
      
      The average is well above what it was when GWB left office:
      
      Good news, however, was not too long in coming. Despite its inauspicious economic beginnings, the Obama administration has overseen an impressive upswing in the stock market. As of Sept. 12, 2014 the Dow Jones has more than recovered from its January 2009 slump, resting nicely at 16,987.51 for the day, more than double what it was on inauguration day. More importantly, it has maintained a healthy average between 14,719 and 17,162 for the past 52 weeks. Though there have been intermittent downturns, the Dow’s general upward trend speaks well for the Obama administration’s efforts at economic recovery.
      
      http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/101314/where-was-dow-jones-when-obama-took-office.asp
      
      LikeLike
      
      Reply
Dreidel

September 20, 2015

But the interest you’re getting from it is hovering at just above zero, when it should be paying at least 5-6%.

If you want to criticize an intelligent woman, skip Carly Fiorina and go after Janet Yellen, who just refused to throw out a life jacket to the stock market.

Yes, my investments have also fully recovered from the Great Recession, but they can’t keep dog-paddling forever. 🙂

LikeLike

Reply
cliff arroyo

September 21, 2015

From my detached point of view and all the sources I look at I get the idea that the US is in a Ralph Kramden economy dominated by get-rich-quick schemes (aka bubbles). They can provide some shiny trinkets for people here and there but they inevitably collapse.

And what about derivatives, everything I’ve heard points to the idea that if the derivative bubble pops then it will make 2008 look like no big deal…

It’s impossible to build a sound economy based on people selling sophisticated financial instruments to each other and there doens’t seem to be a lot else going on.

LikeLike

Reply
cliff arroyo

September 21, 2015

It is also worth bearing in mind that there is no starter job for President of the US. It’s not like any other political position in the country and so there’s no presidential track.

A few years ago the conventional CW was that governors of large states were a good pool for candidates but W kind of ruined that idea.

Effective and ineffective presidents have come from a number of different backgrounds so it’s …. tough to predict who would be a good president.

The biggest problem is of course that the system as it currently stands selects for a good campaigner while the abilities needed to do a good job as president are completely separate. You might get lucky once in a while and find someone who’s both a good campaigner and a good administrator (Clinton the first) that’s not the usual case.

LikeLike

Reply
Jones

September 21, 2015

“… politically, they are rank, arrogant amateurs who can only appeal to those who are too intellectually limited to understand the complexities of the modern world.”

Which of course means that they are shrewd judges of character when it comes to the model American voter — easy to please, hoping for emotional engagement, shorn of the world’s complexities to the point that they may be pulled over the eyes as a form of fleece …

They haven’t misunderstood the baseness of character, and they haven’t failed to present the model American voter with a desired view in kind.

Insofar as the illusion of character goes, it’s now considerably less about professing “commonweal” and more about accepting “realpolitik” — this is especially true of the American Right, which long ago accepted the views of Leo Strauss along with the then-prevailing Chicago School, at least before it started its current journey on the path of economic neo-liberalism …

I figured that as a fan of Freud, you might have sussed this anyway: the patron saint of American elections may as well be his nephew, Edward Bernays.

On a somewhat related yet unrelated note, you realise that the reason I nudged you toward the Wellcome Library in London is that they have a large collection on sexology, and as a resource it might have made a more interesting visit than the Freud Museum itself?

LikeLike

Reply
David P. Bellamy

September 21, 2015

Amateurs are important. In the beginning of his career, Einstein was an amateur physicist. He accomplished so much he was able to become a professional.

While an amateur physicist, Einstein was a patent office clerk.

LikeLike

Reply
1. Clarissa
  
  September 21, 2015
  
  And in the beginning of our lives, we were all naked. That doesn’t mean we should arrive at work undressed. 🙂
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  1. David P. Bellamy
    
    September 21, 2015
    
    And in the beginning of our lives, we were all naked. That doesn’t mean we should arrive at work undressed.
    
    OK, I am confused. What does this have to do with my comment?
    
    LikeLike
    
    Reply
    1. Clarissa
      
      September 21, 2015
      
      Being a president can’t be a beginning of a career. It has to be a culmination.
      
      LikeLike
      
      Reply
      1. Jones
        
        September 23, 2015
        
        In practice, it isn’t that either, but instead the experience works as an insta-filled CV for certain types of diplomatic jobs where boat loads of gravitas are required.
        
        If you believe a certain candidate will be a horrible leader, imagine how that candidate will behave once they’re free of that responsibility and able to work as a “taste maker” for quangos, corporate interests, and the odd pariah state or two …
        
        Actually, I don’t have to imagine anything: I just offered an accurate description of a former Prime Minister.
        
        LikeLike
        
        Reply