Shaken, Not Stirred

Sorry, but you won’t find martini recipes here. No, I’m referring to the assignment given folks elected to an office in the hopes of “shaking things up”. Mayors, governors, presidents: it matters not because, in each case, we look for one person to turn the related ship of state in a new direction. Others, as my friend, Sam, (who will appear in a later example), are brought into a public bureaucracy (school board or some like commission) with the same mandate: shake things up and get this body moving in the right direction. That’s the idea, anyway.

Unfortunately, the “shaking up” refers to the status quo and many pasts, presents, and futures depend on the continuation of things as they are. Jesse Ventura is a good example of what I’m trying to explain. The electorate of Minnesota apparently became disenchanted with the same old politicians doing the same old thing so they gave a retired wrestler the chance to shake things up. And Jesse tried, by god, but with little success. You see, the true power of any state lies in the Legislature. And that body is made up of career politicians. Now, why in the world would this particular group in Minnesota be interested in allowing an outsider to succeed? Wouldn’t that send a message claiming that just about anybody can do this job? And, if so, what happens to the future prospects of those career politicos hoping to one day reside in the Governor’s Mansion themselves? With these thoughts in mind, is it any wonder that Jesse served only one term? His failure was a higher priority than the citizenry of Minnesota, plain and simple.

Arnold Schwarzenegger is another prime example. Granted, he’s not the first movie star to run the Golden State, but he’s the latest and, in the years since Ronald Reagan’s administration, much has changed. Gridlock trumps progress if the other side of the aisle can claim a victory and California’s legislative bodies have stymied progress on virtually all fronts as the state continues to flirt with economic failure. Arnold gets the credit if they come through with a winning solution just as he gets the blame for their failures. And the blame is more palatable when considering the political fallout of opening future elections up to every common man and woman interested in running.

And finally, we get to President Obama. “Change we can believe in” was the message that got him elected, but, once again, many overriding agendas are best served by thwarting such change. It seems that the Republican Party is currently more interested in blocking anything on the premise that it won’t succeed. But should it succeed, their near-term hopes for regaining control of the Congress or White House are dashed. Once again, allowing your opponent to succeed is just not an option.

I wish it were that simple to get things moving in another direction, but ships of state are behemoths that require much coordination and bipartisanship to create even a few degrees of heading change. And, as I’ve tried to illustrate, many are keenly aware that change may well create a negative change in their own goals and finances.

Sam, whom I mentioned above, has been an educator for most of his adult life. In trying to put students first, he has sometimes been caught cross-wise with principals and school boards from time to time. Recently, he was offered a position in a school district to “shake things up”. Well, things were fine until the school board realized that they, too, would experience some shaking and that was something in which they clearly had no desire to participate. “Sam”, they said. “We meant to say that you should shake that other stuff up...not our stuff!” Needless to say, Sam’s contract was not renewed. So much for the shaking.

True to the 21st century, we seem to pin our hopes for the future on one person whose words or deeds rekindle the hope for a better tomorrow. Unless that person is the CEO (or Emperor), I’m afraid that other forces will continue to conspire against any meaningful progress. Does that mean we give up? Hell no, but it should give us a greater insight to the job at hand and perhaps be more patient before we turn to find yet another savior. And one final thought: rarely does “change” look like the “change” we envisioned when we called for it in the first place. Some will lose, but if many more gain then society, as a whole, is all the better for it.