A Nobel Mind is a Terrible Thing to Waste

Jude Hammerle

On October 13, 2008, it was announced that Mr. Paul Krugman would receive the Nobel Prize in Economics. Mr. Krugman is the author or editor of 20 books and more than 200 papers in professional journals and edited volumes. His professional reputation rests largely on work in international trade and finance; he is one of the founders of the “new trade theory,” a major rethinking of the theory of international trade. [1]

On November 3, 2008, one day before the most anticipated presidential election of my lifetime, the same Paul Krugman authored an op-ed article for the New York Times, in which he speculated that the representatives of the Republican party likely to remain in both Houses of Congress–the “Republican Rump”–would be even more conservative than the current composition of the party, and as a result “the G.O.P.’s long transformation into the party of the unreasonable right, a haven for racists and reactionaries, seems likely to accelerate as a result of the impending defeat.” [2]

For what it’s worth, I saw Mr. Krugman’s piece as just more partisan gibbering, another wasted page in a tiresome tale called Democrats v. Republicans.

Democrats v. Republicans is the sad melodrama that has been forced on us by our increasing failure to compete effectively on the world stage. We have a natural compulsion to compete, and when no suitable global competitive diversion exists, we compete among ourselves.

While I’m not a Nobel Prize economist, I understand that part of the job of a lawmaker is to protect the rights of his/her State and its residents, and that these rights sometimes do conflict with the rights of other States and their residents. That said, another important part of the legislator’s job is to work with colleagues from other States when the national interest calls for it. Right now, the national interest is calling at the top of its lungs, yet we continue to dwell on the small picture, the partisan picture, because it is easier to understand.

It disturbs me that a Nobel Prize winner, especially one whose specialty is exactly the international marketplace in which the United States must immediately improve its performance, is wasting his time on this glorious day of days prattling on about the comparatively petty nonsense of politics. I think even Paul Krugman would concede that he is a better man than this, and that it will be a shame if his article of today is remembered as nothing more than a first salvo in the tyranny of a new majority.

This is not an excerpt from How Sex Sells: The Persuasive Power of Identity (a work in process), but it covers the same ground: the sweeping implications of the human compulsion to compete.

                                                               

[1] This brief bio is taken verbatim from the NY Times website: http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/paulkrugman/index.html?inline=nyt-per

[2] http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/03/opinion/03krugman.html?hp

Messing with Texas

Jude Hammerle

Of all the United States, Texas has the clearest brand identity. Aside from its militantly Fun capital,[1] the entire geography and demography of Texas sits deep in the heart of Strong.

Texas takes considerable pride in its proprietary history and culture. Texans proudly note that the flags of six nations have flown over Texas, because it implies that nations come and go, but Texas is forever.[2] For a time, Texas was a republic unto itself. The state flag of Texas depicts a Lone Star on a blue field with a single white and a single red stripe. Simply put, it is the flag of a United State.

Everything about Texas is Strong. Dallas is “Big D.” Texas’s signature industry is Big Oil. Texas leads the nation in executions, with 413 since 1982.[3] And in toxic waste emissions. And in prison construction.[4] The state’s official unofficial motto (official because President George Bush 43 uses it) is “Don’t mess with Texas.” The state’s unofficial unofficial motto is “Everything’s big in Texas.” The University of Texas mascot is the Longhorn. When it became Normal to stop wearing hats in 1960, Texas refused to doff its ten-gallon rebel version, and continues to refuse today.

Dan Rather is from Texas.

Dan Rather is the Alpha journalist who anchored the CBS Evening News for 24 years and one day, from March 9, 1981 through the same date in 2005, the longest service by any anchor in US television history. Rather inherited the ratings leadership from his predecessor Walter Cronkite, lost it, regained it from 1985 to 1989, lost it to Peter Jennings at ABC, and dropped to third place in 1992 when NBC’s Tom Brokaw passed him. Since then, CBS has been unable to move up from third place.

Rather made his name through characteristically tough reporting. He was tough on Nixon. He donned a mujahideen headdress in Afghanistan and was tough on the Soviets. He was so tough on George Bush 41 about the Iran-Contra affair that neither George Bush 41 nor George Bush 43 ever granted him another interview. Saddam Hussein did grant him an interview, and Dan was tough on him, too. His sign-off of choice was “Courage.” It lasted only for one week, but he did reprise it in his last broadcast, his final act of defiance.  

Rather toughened the news culture at CBS so profoundly that his successor in the Evening News anchor chair, Katie Couric, has been unable to leverage her sublimely Normal identity into a higher ranking for her broadcast. CBS seems to have forgotten that Cronkite cried when JFK died, swelled with pride at every success of the space program, and grieved with families as the Vietnam body counts he reported grew nightly. Cronkite was America’s incredibly well-informed uncle. In a word, he was Normal, and we loved him for it. Tom Brokaw was Normal, too. Katie Couric is cut from the same ideal cloth as these two greatest anchors. If she and CBS can embrace the Normal and let go of the Strong, the world is theirs for the taking.

A few weeks after the preceding paragraphs were laid down, in the New York Times dated October 11, 2008, journalist Jacques Steinberg noted the beginnings of a possible turnaround for Couric’s fortunes as anchor. Among similar developments, Steinberg pointed to a recurring segment in Couric’s election coverage called Primary Questions, in which “all of the major candidates…were asked the same 10 questions about character, including the last time they had been angry about something or whether trust in a marriage should be a barometer of trust in office.”[5] At last, it seems that Ms. Couric has turned her gift for the interview format into a quest for answers that will allow Normal people to evaluate a complex issue with supreme confidence and fluency. While she remains third in a three-person race, Ms. Couric’s position on the inside rail of the Normal viewer identity bodes well for her, especially if she has the Courage to press her advantage.

This post is an excerpt from How Sex Sells: The Persuasive Power of Identity, a work in process.

---

[1] I love the “Keep Austin Weird” campaign that encourages city residents to support quirky local businesses.

[2] The six flags are, in chronological order: Spain, France, Mexico, Republic of Texas, USA, Confederate, USA again.

[3] http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/annual.htm

[4] http://www.onthemedia.org/yore/transcripts/transcripts_012101_popculturetexas.html

[5] New York Times, October 11, 2008, p. C1 and following.