Category Archives: Stupidity

My stupidity problem

Watch out, folks; here comes the news of the day!

Yeah, I know: “Brad, the problem you have with stupidity is that you are burdened with far too much of it!”

Thanks, but no, that’s not it.

It has occurred to me that I’ve typed “stupid” a lot lately. Such as here and here and here and here and here.

For some reason, that stuff bothers me more than it used to. It’s why I can hardly bear to read most “news” these days, as I’ve mentioned. It’s just too stupid — what’s discussed, how it’s discussed, the deeply disturbing enthusiasm that so many people bring to the discussion. I’d give you examples, but I don’t like dwelling on these things long enough to type even brief descriptions.

So I push through those things in the various newspapers and magazines to which I subscribe, and try to keep my eyes and ears open, and look for the things I can stand to discuss. Like you, know, Scrooge McDuck and Richie Rich. Or weird artworks of the Renaissance. Computers generating art. Views of the Earth from across the universe. The funeral of King Edward VII in 1910. And no, I’m not trying to give the impression that my topics are more elevated than most “news.” That’s why I started with Scrooge and Richie.

Of course, sometimes I break down and say something about the stupid stuff. I couldn’t help myself here. That one was directly and obviously about stupidity as most folks would define it — and how we live in a time when it is considered smart, in politics, to embrace that stupidity. A postscript on that post: A while ago, I saw a notification that Walker and Warnock were having a debate tonight (I’m writing this on Friday, 10/14), and it could decide the race with early voting about to begin.

You realize what that means, don’t you? The New York Times is saying that there are people in Georgia who would actually consider — who are actually considering — voting for Walker over Warnock. And not just a few people. There are enough of them that the outcome is uncertain — so uncertain that the twitch on someone’s face during one of these spectacles we absurdly call “debates” could decide the whole thing.

Now that’s either stupid in the sense that the editors of The New York Times have lost their minds, or they’re right and this is true. These people who would vote for Walker are not patients under sedation in the most disturbed areas of an insane asylum. They are people to whom we actually grant the awesome power of deciding who will run this country.

What does that say about the rest of us? I’ve stood up for this democracy thing my whole life — proudly proclaimed it, defended it fiercely. And this is what it comes to?

OK, I got sidetracked there. I wasn’t even going to say anything about this kind of stupidity. (After all, as I moaned, “I don’t like dwelling on these things…”.) I was just going to use it as a departure point for what I really wanted to talk about, which is a different kind of stupidity altogether. I was going to go on about it at some length. But not now. I’ve already written more than 500 words. I’ll come back to my actual point in a separate post.

This, by the way, is my kind of stupidity — the kind that actually does overburden me. I let this stuff get to me. I let my mind get boggled, and go off on these digressions. I don’t know of any remedy for it, except to just stop myself when it happens. See you later…

Bonhoeffer and the stupidity factor

You know how I have made this resolution to finally start reading all the good books around the house that I have asked for over the years? I don’t know how many there are, because they’re all over the place and I haven’t done an inventory.

But there’s one I need to move up on the list: Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy, by Eric Metaxas.

I say that because something about the martyred theologian has been brought to my attention a couple of times in recent days.

It’s the fact that he considered stupidity to be more dangerous than evil. And in my book, when a guy who stood up to the Nazis and was executed for trying to rid the world of Hitler says something like that, we should sit up and take notice. Because he knew a thing or two about evil.

Here’s a quote:

“Stupidity is a more dangerous enemy of the good than malice. One may protest against evil; it can be exposed and, if need be, prevented by use of force. Evil always carries within itself the germ of its own subversion in that it leaves behind in human beings at least a sense of unease. Against stupidity we have no defense. Neither protests nor force can touch it. Reasoning is of no use. Facts that contradict personal prejudices can simply be disbelieved — indeed, the fool can counter by criticizing them, and if they are undeniable, they can just be pushed aside as trivial exceptions. So the fool, as distinct from the scoundrel, is completely self-satisfied. In fact, they can easily become dangerous, as it does not take much to make them aggressive. For that reason, greater caution is called for than with a malicious one. Never again will we try to persuade the stupid person with reasons, for it is senseless and dangerous.”

This addresses a question I’ve been pondering a good bit over the past six years — since, you know, 2016. I haven’t written that much about it, because I don’t feel like I can answer my own question — and raising it just gets people so upset. So what’s the point?

Oh, I’ve referred to it in passing. Deep down in a post, you can find me saying things like, So which is it: Is Trump evil, or stupid? Or rather, since he’s obviously both, which is the main problem? What are we dealing with?

Then, of course, the next logical step is to ask the same question regarding his supporters. Because Trump isn’t the actual problem. Trump was an idiot, and a slimeball, for decades, and we all knew it. He was famous for these characteristics. But no one took him seriously. He was just some gross clown at the edges of our society. Sort of a Kardashian, or one of those people on Jersey Shore.

Then, in a complete reversal of American political history up to that point, people started voting for him. So the question becomes, what happened to them — these voters? Yeah, we’d had a long buildup of gross, mindless partisanship for two or three decades leading up to it, and a lot of it was ugly, but what caused it all to go off a cliff in 2016?

I’ve written a good bit about that. But I’ve generally avoided that one question that keeps occurring to me: Is it evil, or stupidity?

Whenever I’ve been about to tackle it with some determination, I dismiss the question as itself being stupid: Obviously, both things are at work. There’s a lot of foolishness out there, and a lot of plain, rotten meanness.

And does it matter what label we put on it? Well, yes, I think so, at least on a moral plane. Being stupid doesn’t make you a bad person, does it? And yet, people often get more offended at being called stupid than evil, don’t they?

So why go there? These folks seem angry all the time anyway; why make it worse? The thing to do is try to think of something to do or say that would make things better, not just increase the massive heap of ill feeling in the world.

In fact, that’s the last thing I want. I want to turn down the temperature, calm everything down, get people to stop being furious and start listening to each other and learn how to live together. To stop thinking in terms of ones and zeroes, and start seeing each other as fellow humans.

But the fact that Dietrich Bonhoeffer wrote these things makes it worth trying to understand better what he was thinking. He wasn’t some idiot Twitter partisan sniping at the “other side” to elevate his own side (“You people are stupid!” “No, we’re not; you are!”). This was a thinking, spiritual man willing to wrestle with moral complexity, and to give everything in that cause.

And there he was, face-to-face with the greatest evil of the past century, if not of all history. And he sat there in his prison cell and wrote that as bad as evil was, stupidity was the greater danger.

Of course, some of why he did this is self-evident: Nazism was stupid. It was an ideology for brutish, ticked-off people, for brawlers battling in the streets, outraged at their lot in life between the wars and wanting something that would show the rest of the world how wrong it was.

But of course, it was also evil as all get-out. Which parts were mainly evil, and which parts mainly stupid? And what was the relationship between the two factors, as they worked together to make horrors happen?

Seems worth exploring. So I need to read that book…