Call it a Mixed Bag, Call it a Compromise - but I call it evil! (The AntiTrump guide to true Political Incorrectness)

Call it a Mixed Bag, Call it a Compromise - but I call it evil! (The AntiTrump guide to true Political Incorrectness)

"When [you call something] a mixed bag, that's like a doctor saying that your acne has cleared up but you have a brain tumor-and calling the diagnosis a mixed bag." - Arianna Huffington

Dear readers, I shall be short and sweet with you: we need to stop accepting the idea of "The Mixed Bag." Call it compromise, call it bundle, call it anything you'd like - it all boils down to the fact that one side, invariably, is getting shafted.

Why are people so ready to abandon ship to satiate someone else's needs? If you believe in something enough to adopt it as a part of your life, why should you settle for less than your ideals demand? Why are someone else's needs paramount to yours?

In this age of political correctness, not to sound like a Mini-Donald here, we have become quick to please the voice of the din around us. We are so terribly afraid of offending the sensibilities of strangers that we are dishonoring our true selves. Our senses of humor have become vanilla and flaccid, buried under a pile of small talk and G-rated anecdotes.

I've noticed, especially observing the younger children in my own family, that parents are shielding their children from what's going on around them. I understand that life is a scary concept, but they need to live in reality. As much as we'd love to live in a Magical Kingdom (note I added the AL so I don't get sued by The Disney Corporation) where everything is perfectly sanitized and proper, but that's not real life. In real life there are dragons, not literal dragons, but rather in the form of war, pestilence, and plague. These children are becoming sheltered from the lessons they can learn by observing the world as it is.

A Mixed Bag is a kindly way of saying that both parties are losing something they want. If the person you compromise with is an inferior intellect, why should you have to morph his idea into yours and potentially gum up the plumbing? Why not fight fight fight for your stance and, if something goes wrong, you hold the blame entirely. By entering into a Mixed Bag compromise, you are basically saying that you know this is a rotten idea, but at least you'll both get equal blame.

There's no need for compromise for the individual who believes in themselves. To a person who forms an idea within them, nurtures it, and truly slaves over it, why should they put it in another person's hands to vandalize?

Politics are rife with this unfortunate fact of life. You constantly see politicians playing a year or decade long game of hot potato, waiting for the other person to get blown to smithereens and take the fall. There is not one politician today, and I mean this with all sincerity, who is truly an independent thinker. All of them have gone through a colander, their true essence lost in a mash of their party's foibles and prejudices.

To start anew, we must learn to think independently and not worry about boards, committees, sub-committees, electoral colleges, quorums, and task forces to shuffling the deck and leaving us high and dry. We need to form our ideas in an independent way and implement them with like-minded people or by yourself. Our Law system is a perfect example of this problem: There's no good reason to put twelve people with completely different biases together in one room and hope that they will check their preconceived notions at the door. It boggles the mind that even our Judicial system is still the result of a Mixed Bag philosophy.

This notion, as I have shown, is key to why we're going down the crapper. Look around your life and see how much GroupThink has torn apart what works in this country. We've tried to please the herd for years and we've dug ourselves into a pit the size of Oprah Winfrey's yoga pants trying to accommodate the din of the crowd.

I ask you today to, at work, school, home, and beyond, to stop accepting that we have to accommodate and compromise what we believe is right. If you know Greg hasn't done the proper research, then you shouldn't have to craft a skyscraper together. If Sharon insists that the boss said the president needed his report by the fifth, when you know its the fourth, why should you argue with her, instead of just severing yourself and getting the job done? Why do schools have to teach Creationism, Evolution, and God knows what else all jumbled into one science course?

The writing is on the wall, people, and I can assure you that its not the middle of a Venn Diagram.

---

Join my email list to keep up to date on my ramblings!

Comments

Leave a comment
  • I believe in a mixed bag of both red and green M&Ms. I don't know if they still sell them.

    However, one has to have some principles. Bringing up your jury example, a "jury of your peers" does not mean an entitlement to 6 convicts on it; in fact any convict would probably be subject to a strike for cause. Police officers get called, but I don't think they serve.

    Of course the weenies you describe are like Paul Ryan, who has to support the candidate but denounce everything he says. I said somewhere else on Chicago Now that while one might not know what principles Ted Cruz has, he shows that the has some, by not doing that. While compromise has sometimes been defined as a "good compromise is that neither gets what he wants," at some point it becomes hypocrisy. That's recognizing that Mother Theresa is not running in this election.

Leave a comment