Happiness is a Trap

At least that seems to be the opinion of Daniel Gilbert (Harvard professor of Psychology), as expressed in this editorial at the New York Times. Gilbert's article is on how we Democrats are reacting to President Bush's inauguration. Basically his thesis is that most people have developed coping mechanisms to deal with these kinds of disappointments. We will find the silver lining.

Of course he suggests we will find the silver lining in pettiness and low-grade hypocrisy.

So when President Bush puts his hand on the Bible today and begins his second term, Republicans will not be the only ones thinking about how lucky they are. Democrats will surely remind one another that the dollar is down, the deficit is up, foreign relations are in disarray and the party that presides over this looming miasma may well have elected its last president for decades to come.

At the same time, Democrats will tell themselves that they did everything they could - they wrote more checks and cast more ballots than ever before - so if the president and his party insist that Democrats now enjoy a fat tax break, then why feel guilty?

The funny thing is, this is something I've said (well not the part about the Tax Cuts) a few times. The country is kind of a mess, and President Bush and the conservative philosophy he espouses should be presented with the bill for that mess. But now that I see the idea in other words it does strike me as a little petty. President Bush isn't really going to have to pay much of a price, compared to the working class in this country or the soldiers in Iraq.

I also don't know what to make of the end of Gilbert's essay. ". . . tomorrow it will be a nation - and not a party - that faces the dire problems of war, terrorism, poverty and intolerance. Perhaps over the next four years we would all be wise to suppress our natural talent for happiness and strive instead to be truly, deeply distressed." Is Gilbert suggesting we need to get distressed at President Bush and hold his feet to the fire? Or is he suggesting we need to get distressed at the problems America is facing and stand with President Bush to solve them (which would kind of ignore the fact that some of these problems were, more or less, created by President Bush)?

At any rate, I think we should be distressed about where President Bush has taken and is taking our country. I think we should be upset. I think that even anger is a not inappropriate response to some of the actions President Bush has taken. But we can't let our anger consume us. We can't simply rail against the injustices of the Bush administration, against a foreign policy built around belligerence and a domestic policy built around helping those who need little help and hurting those who are already hurting. Instead we need to discover and present a different vision for America. We need to discover America again, not just in our capital, but in our states, in our cities, in our communities and in our homes. That's really the only long term way to counter this current political climate.