Skip to main content

Personal Responsibility and Mike Phelps

Steve's recent post noting the silence of those who may have overextended themselves in the recent runup to our current economic malady hit a nerve for me. I think he's hit on the greatest problem with American society -- the reason why we're not able to succeed anymore.

Consider the case of Olympic athlete Michael Phelps. He is the most awarded Olympian in modern history -- a tour-de-force of prowess who brought home gold medals in fistfuls. I remember sitting with friends, watching the game. Their expanding waistlines strained as they chowed down on nachos, guzzled Budweiser, and shouted "we did it!" when Phelps won.

I wanted to say "'we' had nothing to do with it." Phelps did all the hard work. He trained hard for 11 hours a day. He skipped out on nachos and Bud. He maintained a near 0% bodyfat level. He did things that the average American simply couldn't do.

Yet we weren't willing to let his victory be his -- no, it was "ours."

Fast forward to the recent bong-hit "scandal." The press is full of angry commentators demanding Phelps's blood, speaking of "betrayal," demanding punishment.

The irony is amazing. At least 1/3 of them are full-out hypocrites, since that's about the proportion of Americans who has ever tried pot. The remainder, wheedling about "what it teaches their children," would be better off not feeding them high-calorie-density foods (since about 40% of children are overweight).

In today's America, success belongs to "everybody," while personal responsibility is something for other people. By sloughing off our own failings, pointing angrily at the latest celebrity whose personal failings are splashed across news pages, and mouthing cheap rhetoric, we feel "justified" in our own existences.

We never strive for true personal success, since vicarious "success" is easier. And we never admit our own mistakes.

To truly excel takes hard work, a clear view of one's weak points, and a willingness to repeatedly fail on the road to success. If Americans are unwilling to try to succeed themselves, unwilling to admit and deal with their own bad decisions, and unwilling to try to better themselves (rather than condemn others), we are doomed to eternal decline.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...