Hey, I'm no community organizer, but this oil slick is sure crying out for one. Wouldn't it be great if someone figured out a way to organize the entire world so it would quickly mobilize and clean-up that oil for us? Interestingly, there is an organizing technique called a "market" and when harnessed through incentives, it is the most powerful tool in any organizer's quiver. If a decent community organizer was in charge today, he'd surely turn the market loose by paying a huge BOUNTY for any recovered oil.
Imagine what a bounty of 10 times the going price for a barrel of oil would do: Do you suppose an idle Saudi tanker or two, half-way across the world, might make a bee line to the Gulf of Mexico to skim millions of barrels of oil and make a huge profit? Heck yeah! Might you lease a monster boat and head for the Gulf if you were an unemployed sailor with some equally idle mates? Would some Somali pirates turn their talents to skimming oil instead of ransom? Might Turkish ships turn to skimming black gold instead of running Gaza blockades? You betcha! You betcha! And you betcha.
But alas, community organizers who understand markets and incentives are in extremely short supply, so instead of a solution, we get threats of an "ass kicking". Now who wouldn't want to sail around the globe and skim, baby, skim, for a good ole' ass kickin'?
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Ground Zero Mosque
By now you've probably heard about the 13 story mosque being proposed a stones-throw from ground zero in New York. The city has approved the plan and Mayor Michael Bloomberg has warmly embraced the mega-mosque as a symbol of American tolerance and freedom of religion. Yada yada yada.
This is not the last time we will be duped by “takia” (or "taqiyya"), the concept in Islam that amounts to a command to never speak truth to infidels. We hear the soothing words of the so-called “moderate Muslims” and repeat the unsupported mantra that most Muslims are vehemently opposed to terrorism and support tolerance and freedom of religion. That is absolute hogwash and The Mayor of New York should at least understand this and remain neutral. This mosque is an end-zone dance on the graves of the 9/11 victims and must be understood as such. As prominent New York Rabbi Joseph Potasnik stated, “Just because something is legal, doesn’t make it right.”
Yes, the Mosque should be allowed as a matter of law and so should my proposed project which will surround the 13 story mosque on all four sides: First there will be the “Divine Church of the Naked Female” a 20 story building shaped like, well, a sexy naked female and built directly on the Mecca side of the mosque looking down on it. Next would be the new home of the “US Hog Farming Association”, a 15 story building shaped like a pig and just to the right of the mosque. On the other side would be a giant synagogue (no view of the USHFA bldg.) also towering over the mosque and shaped like either a Star of David or the State of Israel. To the rear and shaped like a large cocked working catapult complete with flaming catapult ball would be the new “Museum of Crusader Victories”, a 20 story monument to Christian victories during the Crusades.
Peace be upon you…
This is not the last time we will be duped by “takia” (or "taqiyya"), the concept in Islam that amounts to a command to never speak truth to infidels. We hear the soothing words of the so-called “moderate Muslims” and repeat the unsupported mantra that most Muslims are vehemently opposed to terrorism and support tolerance and freedom of religion. That is absolute hogwash and The Mayor of New York should at least understand this and remain neutral. This mosque is an end-zone dance on the graves of the 9/11 victims and must be understood as such. As prominent New York Rabbi Joseph Potasnik stated, “Just because something is legal, doesn’t make it right.”
Yes, the Mosque should be allowed as a matter of law and so should my proposed project which will surround the 13 story mosque on all four sides: First there will be the “Divine Church of the Naked Female” a 20 story building shaped like, well, a sexy naked female and built directly on the Mecca side of the mosque looking down on it. Next would be the new home of the “US Hog Farming Association”, a 15 story building shaped like a pig and just to the right of the mosque. On the other side would be a giant synagogue (no view of the USHFA bldg.) also towering over the mosque and shaped like either a Star of David or the State of Israel. To the rear and shaped like a large cocked working catapult complete with flaming catapult ball would be the new “Museum of Crusader Victories”, a 20 story monument to Christian victories during the Crusades.
Peace be upon you…
Stupidity Defined
If you’ll permit me another health analogy ( I just love ‘em!), what would you learn from the following scenario? After a lifetime of smoking, eating junk food, being sedentary, and feeling mostly ok, you then play a few minutes of basketball only to suffer horrible chest pains. If you were intelligent, you might heed the warning and quickly change your lifestyle, quit smoking, eat healthy foods, exercise regularly, and play basketball only within your fitness level. If you were downright stupid, and knew nothing about health, you might conclude the opposite and determine that exertion is just totally unhealthy. After all, you never had chest pain before! Obviously, exercise is way too dangerous and should be avoided at all costs while smoking, eating junk food, and sitting around is the way to never have chest pain again. Phew, glad we dodged that bullet!
The latter is exactly the policy equivalent of Barack Obama and the ruling Democrat party when it comes to the economy. According to their Re-Distributionist and Demand Side Economic Policies, free markets, hard work, risk, reward, and equality of opportunity are the bane of our economic system when in-fact, they are the healthy lifestyle and cardio-vascular excercises which have made us a vibrant healthy economy for much of our history. Re-distribution, Demand Side Economics, bailouts, government takeovers, and equality of outcomes are the cigarettes, junk food and sedentary lifestyles which are the official policies of our current government.
The next basketball game is going to be very interesting…
The latter is exactly the policy equivalent of Barack Obama and the ruling Democrat party when it comes to the economy. According to their Re-Distributionist and Demand Side Economic Policies, free markets, hard work, risk, reward, and equality of opportunity are the bane of our economic system when in-fact, they are the healthy lifestyle and cardio-vascular excercises which have made us a vibrant healthy economy for much of our history. Re-distribution, Demand Side Economics, bailouts, government takeovers, and equality of outcomes are the cigarettes, junk food and sedentary lifestyles which are the official policies of our current government.
The next basketball game is going to be very interesting…
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Another Katrina?
If I told you there was a leak in a gold pipeline and gold coins were spewing out all over the bottom of the ocean, you would know some intrepid treasure hunters would be on the case recovering all that free gold. So why is precious oil washing up on the marshes of Louisiana and why has this become such an environmental disaster? Why doesn't BP offer a bounty for every barrel of recovered oil? Is it possible that loose oil is just too difficult to recover? No, I don’t believe that’s the problem. This spill is a lot like Katrina in the sense that it shows how, for a number of reasons, we are incapable of taking care of ourselves in a crisis.
I used to be in the waste-water treatment business and I can tell you that, (this is going to surprise you), water and oil do not mix. Moreover, oil tends to float. Much of it is just sitting on the surface! The technology for separating oil and water is simple, cheap and plentiful. All we would need is a bunch of unemployed sailors, (like maybe fishermen who can’t fish), some barges with giant tanks, a bunch of huge pumps, floating skimmers, some hoses, and land and/or sea based oil water separators.
The problem with this is, the permits for all this would take some two years to get, the equipment would most likely have to be imported, the fishermen are getting unemployment checks so don’t need to work, there’s probably more money in a juicy lawsuit, the environmentalists want the issue around for political gain, and besides, the government will bail everyone out anyway, so why sweat! Meanwhile, the oil floats and spreads out.
Isn’t that just like Katrina? New Orleans didn’t have to worry about building their city below sea level in hurricane alley because the Government built them a nifty levee system and then threw hundreds of billions at them when it failed. Private donations are still flowing like water and they got to use the whole fiasco for political gain. It worked so well, they are rebuilding below sea level again.
Ben Franklin famously said; "Those who would trade liberty for security deserve neither." Ronald Reagan went further and said; “You and I are told increasingly that we have to choose between a left or right, but I would like to suggest that there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down -- up to man's age-old dream -- the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order--or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism, and regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course."
We always think of totalitarian regimes as those led by a strongman like Saddam Hussein, Fidel Castro, or Kim Jong il, but is it possible that all that's needed for totalitarianism to flourish is a culture of dependency and an illusion of security?
I used to be in the waste-water treatment business and I can tell you that, (this is going to surprise you), water and oil do not mix. Moreover, oil tends to float. Much of it is just sitting on the surface! The technology for separating oil and water is simple, cheap and plentiful. All we would need is a bunch of unemployed sailors, (like maybe fishermen who can’t fish), some barges with giant tanks, a bunch of huge pumps, floating skimmers, some hoses, and land and/or sea based oil water separators.
The problem with this is, the permits for all this would take some two years to get, the equipment would most likely have to be imported, the fishermen are getting unemployment checks so don’t need to work, there’s probably more money in a juicy lawsuit, the environmentalists want the issue around for political gain, and besides, the government will bail everyone out anyway, so why sweat! Meanwhile, the oil floats and spreads out.
Isn’t that just like Katrina? New Orleans didn’t have to worry about building their city below sea level in hurricane alley because the Government built them a nifty levee system and then threw hundreds of billions at them when it failed. Private donations are still flowing like water and they got to use the whole fiasco for political gain. It worked so well, they are rebuilding below sea level again.
Ben Franklin famously said; "Those who would trade liberty for security deserve neither." Ronald Reagan went further and said; “You and I are told increasingly that we have to choose between a left or right, but I would like to suggest that there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down -- up to man's age-old dream -- the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order--or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism, and regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course."
We always think of totalitarian regimes as those led by a strongman like Saddam Hussein, Fidel Castro, or Kim Jong il, but is it possible that all that's needed for totalitarianism to flourish is a culture of dependency and an illusion of security?
Monday, May 24, 2010
Aspirin was Invented in Europe, Right?
There are about 60,000 miles of blood vessels in the human body. Yet if a pinpoint sized blockage occurs in exactly the right spot, it can quickly kill a person with 59,999.99 miles of otherwise healthy blood vessels. All it takes is one strategic blockage to bring the whole system down. Want an aspirin?
With that in mind, consider the line of argument you may have heard about the financial meltdown and how it could not possibly have been caused by subprime loans and the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). The argument goes something like this: “Yes, there were some subprime loans that went bad and some of them were even mandated by the CRA which Bill Clinton re-wrote along with help from Barack Obama and ACORN to force banks to make really bad loans and yes, the bad lending was massively encouraged by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac which again was championed by Clinton, Obama, ACORN, the Congressional Black Caucus, and the entire Democrat Party with an assist from some key Republicans including even George W Bush. But there were nowhere near enough of these government sponsored bad loans to explain the systemic meltdown we saw in 2007 and 2008. Nothing to see here. Move along.”
What is so fascinating about this argument is that I’ve heard it from some of the same economists and “experts” who argue that Greece may cause a chain reaction and bring down the Euro, then Europe, then the Northern Hemisphere, and finally the World! So we are being asked to believe that a country with about 2% of the entire GDP of Europe can bring down the whole world while Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the CRA couldn’t possibly have been the blockage that gave the financial system a coronary?
Can both of these views be right? Is most of Europe healthy to start with? Was the rest of the US mortgage market healthy too? What if there is both disease and a strategic blockage? I’m jus’ askin’.
PS You may want that aspirin just in case…
With that in mind, consider the line of argument you may have heard about the financial meltdown and how it could not possibly have been caused by subprime loans and the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). The argument goes something like this: “Yes, there were some subprime loans that went bad and some of them were even mandated by the CRA which Bill Clinton re-wrote along with help from Barack Obama and ACORN to force banks to make really bad loans and yes, the bad lending was massively encouraged by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac which again was championed by Clinton, Obama, ACORN, the Congressional Black Caucus, and the entire Democrat Party with an assist from some key Republicans including even George W Bush. But there were nowhere near enough of these government sponsored bad loans to explain the systemic meltdown we saw in 2007 and 2008. Nothing to see here. Move along.”
What is so fascinating about this argument is that I’ve heard it from some of the same economists and “experts” who argue that Greece may cause a chain reaction and bring down the Euro, then Europe, then the Northern Hemisphere, and finally the World! So we are being asked to believe that a country with about 2% of the entire GDP of Europe can bring down the whole world while Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the CRA couldn’t possibly have been the blockage that gave the financial system a coronary?
Can both of these views be right? Is most of Europe healthy to start with? Was the rest of the US mortgage market healthy too? What if there is both disease and a strategic blockage? I’m jus’ askin’.
PS You may want that aspirin just in case…
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Economics, Morals, and Linkage
Let's do a simple thought experiment: imagine a world where you could ingest any substance you wanted, and some other anonymous sucker would suffer the consequences. Want a whole cheesecake? Fine! Eat away and some Mongolian or Kazakh would put on the weight. Want to get drunk on whiskey and beer? Go ahead. Some African or Israeli will get the hangover. Like fried foods? Not to worry. Live on fried chicken and french fries and some other sucker will suffer the coronary.
How long do you think we'd survive as a species in that world? I'd give us about a week. The only thing that's kept us alive all these centuries is the accountability of knowing that high risk behavior could kill us. End accountability, end the linkage, allow the amoral transfer of unlimited risk to anonymous others, and we are doomed.
Guess what? That is the economic world we live in and the death spiral is playing out in various places around the world including the US.
What do Greece, California, healthcare, runaway deficits, the mortgage meltdown, rising taxes, and high unemployment all have in common? Yeah, I know they are all in the news, but that's not the answer. No the correct answer is that in all cases, these things got to crisis levels because of Demand Side Economics (DSE) and its breakdown in Economic Linkage. Economic Linkage is the degree to which benefactors and beneficiaries are in a direct relationship. Once the link is broken, the amoral nature of DSE is obscured thus opening the door to the death spiral. That is the scenario we are seeing played out today.
In a previous post I defined Demand Side Economics (DSE) and this would be a good time to read it, or re-read it. Go ahead, follow the link. I can wait... The Irony of Keynes - Demand Side Economics
Ok, now that you have the background, you may be asking; Why would we fall for DSE time and time again after being burned whenever it is tried? And how do we get around the moral problems of DSE redistribution? The answer is Linkage. No linkage, no direct moral confrontation. We are allowed to act in morally ambiguous ways when the victims are anonymous. This is why Air Force pilots have an easier time dropping a bomb on a city than an infantryman does killing one person in hand to hand combat.
In Greece, the Greek beneficiaries of DSE who could retire at 53 with full pay and sail the Mediterranean knowing that some German would keep working and eventually bail out his bankrupt government was acting rationally, though not morally. The Californian legislator who kept himself in office by delivering DSE goodies to his constituents while bankrupting his country and state knows Washington will bail him out and stick the bill with some hard-working unborn innocent in Kansas. He is acting rationally, but not morally. American taxpayers and voters know they are passing debts onto their children and grandchildren, but hey, they like their social security, medicare, mortgage deductions, and new right-to-healthcare more than their obligations to someone else's kids. They are acting rationally but amorally too. The thing is, we are good at morals when faced with judgement face to face. But what if the poor sucker who has to pay for our greed is someone we will never have to face? This is how civilizations die.
How long do you think we'd survive as a species in that world? I'd give us about a week. The only thing that's kept us alive all these centuries is the accountability of knowing that high risk behavior could kill us. End accountability, end the linkage, allow the amoral transfer of unlimited risk to anonymous others, and we are doomed.
Guess what? That is the economic world we live in and the death spiral is playing out in various places around the world including the US.
What do Greece, California, healthcare, runaway deficits, the mortgage meltdown, rising taxes, and high unemployment all have in common? Yeah, I know they are all in the news, but that's not the answer. No the correct answer is that in all cases, these things got to crisis levels because of Demand Side Economics (DSE) and its breakdown in Economic Linkage. Economic Linkage is the degree to which benefactors and beneficiaries are in a direct relationship. Once the link is broken, the amoral nature of DSE is obscured thus opening the door to the death spiral. That is the scenario we are seeing played out today.
In a previous post I defined Demand Side Economics (DSE) and this would be a good time to read it, or re-read it. Go ahead, follow the link. I can wait... The Irony of Keynes - Demand Side Economics
Ok, now that you have the background, you may be asking; Why would we fall for DSE time and time again after being burned whenever it is tried? And how do we get around the moral problems of DSE redistribution? The answer is Linkage. No linkage, no direct moral confrontation. We are allowed to act in morally ambiguous ways when the victims are anonymous. This is why Air Force pilots have an easier time dropping a bomb on a city than an infantryman does killing one person in hand to hand combat.
In Greece, the Greek beneficiaries of DSE who could retire at 53 with full pay and sail the Mediterranean knowing that some German would keep working and eventually bail out his bankrupt government was acting rationally, though not morally. The Californian legislator who kept himself in office by delivering DSE goodies to his constituents while bankrupting his country and state knows Washington will bail him out and stick the bill with some hard-working unborn innocent in Kansas. He is acting rationally, but not morally. American taxpayers and voters know they are passing debts onto their children and grandchildren, but hey, they like their social security, medicare, mortgage deductions, and new right-to-healthcare more than their obligations to someone else's kids. They are acting rationally but amorally too. The thing is, we are good at morals when faced with judgement face to face. But what if the poor sucker who has to pay for our greed is someone we will never have to face? This is how civilizations die.
Saturday, May 1, 2010
Voter Avoidance Tax
The VAT is coming. By now, enough trial balloons have been launched that it is beginning to look like the movie “Up” where the entire house takes flight under a colorful canopy of helium filled gum-drops. The “Value Added Tax”. The name alone is enough to make statists get a tingly sensation running down their legs. What is it about this particular tax that so sparks the imagination of Big Government types? Well, for one it’s a hidden tax. Second, it's a stealth tax. And third, it is a tax that no voter will ever be aware of paying. Wait a minute, all three of those things are the same! That’s just it, the hidden nature of the VAT is it’s only “Raison D’etra”. (that’s French for we’re all screwed...)
The VAT collects a ton of money, requires a huge expansion of police power, no one pays it directly, and politicians can raise it endlessly without ever being held accountable. In short, it is the perfect tax from the government’s perspective. From the citizens perspective, not so much. When you hear VAT, think “Voter Avoidance Tax”. It’s the perfect crime.
The VAT collects a ton of money, requires a huge expansion of police power, no one pays it directly, and politicians can raise it endlessly without ever being held accountable. In short, it is the perfect tax from the government’s perspective. From the citizens perspective, not so much. When you hear VAT, think “Voter Avoidance Tax”. It’s the perfect crime.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
The Biggest Derivative of All
So all of Washington has declared war on "Synthetic Derivatives" and the institutions which issue and trade them. Did it ever occur to these geniuses that the biggest "Synthetic Derivative" of all is the US Dollar? Chew on that one for a moment.
Goodbye Supply Side
(This is in response to an article, "Goodbye Supply Side" , which appeared in the May 3rd issue of National Review)
In “Goodbye Supply Side”(National Review, May 3), Kevin D. Williamson blurs the definitions of Supply Side Economics, the Laffer Curve, and their relationship to each other in an otherwise cogent piece about runaway government spending by both parties. Supply Side Economics and its opposite, Demand Side Economics, deal with the behavior of individual economic actors and their propensity to create economic activity under certain circumstances. The Laffer Curve deals with government revenues and its relative levels under certain circumstances. While taxes are involved in both formulations, that is the extent of the overlap. One is about government and the other about the economy. Mr. Williamson blurs the lines in an attempt to discredit one by disproving the other but succeeds in neither attempt.
One way to square the circle for Mr. Williamson would be to state the definition of Supply Side Economics in contemporary terms and by doing so, solve the conundrum of spending, taxes, and growth which he is addressing. The contemporary definition of Supply/Demand Side Economics is as follows:
• Supply Side Economics is the theory that People free of government imposed wealth re-distribution* will maximize the Supply of labor and the desire to produce, which will maximize the Supply of goods and services and hence, maximize economic activity. (Production Rules!)
• Demand Side Economics is the theory that Government imposed wealth re-distribution* will maximize the Demand for goods and services and the desire to consume, which will maximize the Demand for labor and hence, maximize economic activity. (Consumption Rules!)
*In both cases the wealth re-distribution can be from taxes or regulation and may be from rich to poor, generation to generation, state to state, group to group, etc.
You’ll notice that these contemporary definitions hinge on government imposed wealth re-distribution which is the root cause of overspending and the heart of the dispute between these two theories. Prior to the death of The Constitution (pick your date), we had a self-limiting government which performed a few essential things which allowed the US to prosper like no other country on the planet in an un-intentional and un-equivocal Supply Side proof. Now that we have un-limited government, we can never control spending without a return to The Constitution and will most likely end up in a death spiral of debt rate-spreads and currency devaluation. Think Argentina and Greece on steroids. Goodbye Supply Side indeed.
In “Goodbye Supply Side”(National Review, May 3), Kevin D. Williamson blurs the definitions of Supply Side Economics, the Laffer Curve, and their relationship to each other in an otherwise cogent piece about runaway government spending by both parties. Supply Side Economics and its opposite, Demand Side Economics, deal with the behavior of individual economic actors and their propensity to create economic activity under certain circumstances. The Laffer Curve deals with government revenues and its relative levels under certain circumstances. While taxes are involved in both formulations, that is the extent of the overlap. One is about government and the other about the economy. Mr. Williamson blurs the lines in an attempt to discredit one by disproving the other but succeeds in neither attempt.
One way to square the circle for Mr. Williamson would be to state the definition of Supply Side Economics in contemporary terms and by doing so, solve the conundrum of spending, taxes, and growth which he is addressing. The contemporary definition of Supply/Demand Side Economics is as follows:
• Supply Side Economics is the theory that People free of government imposed wealth re-distribution* will maximize the Supply of labor and the desire to produce, which will maximize the Supply of goods and services and hence, maximize economic activity. (Production Rules!)
• Demand Side Economics is the theory that Government imposed wealth re-distribution* will maximize the Demand for goods and services and the desire to consume, which will maximize the Demand for labor and hence, maximize economic activity. (Consumption Rules!)
*In both cases the wealth re-distribution can be from taxes or regulation and may be from rich to poor, generation to generation, state to state, group to group, etc.
You’ll notice that these contemporary definitions hinge on government imposed wealth re-distribution which is the root cause of overspending and the heart of the dispute between these two theories. Prior to the death of The Constitution (pick your date), we had a self-limiting government which performed a few essential things which allowed the US to prosper like no other country on the planet in an un-intentional and un-equivocal Supply Side proof. Now that we have un-limited government, we can never control spending without a return to The Constitution and will most likely end up in a death spiral of debt rate-spreads and currency devaluation. Think Argentina and Greece on steroids. Goodbye Supply Side indeed.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
STAGES OF ADJUSTMENT AFTER A COUP D’ETAT
The following post is copied from it’s origin text except the words rape and rapist have been changed to coup d’etat and offender. I hope this helps with the adjustment.
Oh, and to all those optimists who believe Obamacare repeal is possible? Ask any rape victim if that is an option! (Also, to any rape victim, I apologize for stretching the analogy.)
STAGES OF ADJUSTMENT AFTER A COUP D’ETAT
Every person going through a crisis (regardless of the type of crisis) progresses through stages of emotional adjustment. The following information is a simple guideline for understanding what a coup d’etat survivor may experience during the period of adjustment after a coup.
There is no set time-line. Adjustment is an individual, personal process; it varies from person to person, and situation to situation. Some may spend a great deal of time in one stage and only touch lightly on another. The survivor may also encounter a spiraling effect while passing through a number of the stages over and over again, each time experiencing them with a different intensity.
Anyone close to the victim may also experience these stages as s/he, too, adjusts to the crisis of a coup d’etat.
•SHOCK—Numbness
Offering information to the survivor during this stage is not helpful, as s/he will likely remember very little, if anything, about what occurs during this time period.
•DENIAL—“Not me, I’m fine.” “This can’t have happened!” “It’s not that bad.”
Not yet able to face the severity of the crisis, the survivor spends time gathering strength. The denial phase serves as a cushion for the more difficult stages of adjustment that follow.
•ANGER—Rage, Resentment… “What did I do?” “Why me?”
A survivor’s anger may be the result of having experienced a loss of strength or loss of control over her/his life. The anger may be directed toward the offenders, a doctor, the police, or anyone else, including her/himself.
•PLEA-BARGAINING—Rationalization… “Let’s go on as if it didn’t happen.” “I should be finished with this by now.”
This is another form of denial wherein the survivor sets up a bargain: s/he will not talk about the coup d’etat in exchange for not having to experience further pain. The other half of the bargain is that friends and relatives will also stop talking about it and pretend that it never happened. In so doing, s/he continues to deny the emotional impact the coup d’etat had on her/his life.
•DEPRESSION—Denial no longer works… “I feel so dirty, so worthless.”
If the survivor is warned of this stage ahead of time, s/he may not be so thrown by this experience. Though painful, this stage signifies s/he has begun to face the reality of a coup d’etat. As s/he allows the negative emotions to surface, s/he should be reminded that these feelings are normal and will not last forever. S/he should, however, be aware of symptoms of severe depression during this stage, for example: drastic changes in sleeping or eating habits, compulsive rituals or generalized fears taking control of her/his life. Professional counseling may be advisable.
•ACCEPTANCE—“Life can go on.”
When enough of the anger and depression is released, the survivor enters acceptance. S/he may still spend time thinking and talking about the coup d’etat, but s/he understands and is in control of emotions; s/he can now accept what has happened.
•ASSIMILATION—The coup d’etat is put into perspective.
By the time the survivor reaches this stage, s/he has realized her/his own selfworth and strength. S/he no longer needs to spend time dealing with the coup d’etat, as the total coup d’etat experience now meshes with other life experiences.
Oh, and to all those optimists who believe Obamacare repeal is possible? Ask any rape victim if that is an option! (Also, to any rape victim, I apologize for stretching the analogy.)
STAGES OF ADJUSTMENT AFTER A COUP D’ETAT
Every person going through a crisis (regardless of the type of crisis) progresses through stages of emotional adjustment. The following information is a simple guideline for understanding what a coup d’etat survivor may experience during the period of adjustment after a coup.
There is no set time-line. Adjustment is an individual, personal process; it varies from person to person, and situation to situation. Some may spend a great deal of time in one stage and only touch lightly on another. The survivor may also encounter a spiraling effect while passing through a number of the stages over and over again, each time experiencing them with a different intensity.
Anyone close to the victim may also experience these stages as s/he, too, adjusts to the crisis of a coup d’etat.
•SHOCK—Numbness
Offering information to the survivor during this stage is not helpful, as s/he will likely remember very little, if anything, about what occurs during this time period.
•DENIAL—“Not me, I’m fine.” “This can’t have happened!” “It’s not that bad.”
Not yet able to face the severity of the crisis, the survivor spends time gathering strength. The denial phase serves as a cushion for the more difficult stages of adjustment that follow.
•ANGER—Rage, Resentment… “What did I do?” “Why me?”
A survivor’s anger may be the result of having experienced a loss of strength or loss of control over her/his life. The anger may be directed toward the offenders, a doctor, the police, or anyone else, including her/himself.
•PLEA-BARGAINING—Rationalization… “Let’s go on as if it didn’t happen.” “I should be finished with this by now.”
This is another form of denial wherein the survivor sets up a bargain: s/he will not talk about the coup d’etat in exchange for not having to experience further pain. The other half of the bargain is that friends and relatives will also stop talking about it and pretend that it never happened. In so doing, s/he continues to deny the emotional impact the coup d’etat had on her/his life.
•DEPRESSION—Denial no longer works… “I feel so dirty, so worthless.”
If the survivor is warned of this stage ahead of time, s/he may not be so thrown by this experience. Though painful, this stage signifies s/he has begun to face the reality of a coup d’etat. As s/he allows the negative emotions to surface, s/he should be reminded that these feelings are normal and will not last forever. S/he should, however, be aware of symptoms of severe depression during this stage, for example: drastic changes in sleeping or eating habits, compulsive rituals or generalized fears taking control of her/his life. Professional counseling may be advisable.
•ACCEPTANCE—“Life can go on.”
When enough of the anger and depression is released, the survivor enters acceptance. S/he may still spend time thinking and talking about the coup d’etat, but s/he understands and is in control of emotions; s/he can now accept what has happened.
•ASSIMILATION—The coup d’etat is put into perspective.
By the time the survivor reaches this stage, s/he has realized her/his own selfworth and strength. S/he no longer needs to spend time dealing with the coup d’etat, as the total coup d’etat experience now meshes with other life experiences.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)