Ideology: an excuse not to think

Ronald Reagan didn't trust ideologies, neither do I.  In his famous "speech" in 1964, he said that he didn't believe that the choice was between right or left, but between freedom and tyranny.  When it comes to the events of the day, I think that model holds as well today as the day he uttered it.  In my own opinion, I am coming to the conclusion that ideology makes us stupid.  That's because when people start believing in a system, then they stop thinking.  The system is supposed to take care of problems instead of human reasoning.  A system, as such, does not think.  But people are obliged to, if they want to solve problems.

If Paul Krugman really wanted to elevate the public discourse, would he make false accusations?  No.  But the thing that drives Paul Krugman is his ideology.  Even more, his ideology drives him to the hatred that the attributes to those who disagree with him.  What else could drive Krugman to falsely accuse others of a crime that they had nothing to do with?  He is so sure that the evidence exists that he prejudges its existence before any investigation can yield any facts on the matter.  Even when no existence is forthcoming, he maintains his position on a firm belief that the rhetoric of those he doesn't agree with had something to do with the shootings in Arizona.  Yet there is no rational basis for his belief.  Perhaps something may turn up, but why not keep his peace in the meantime?  He can't keep his peace because his ideology will not permit it.  His ideology drives him to do something that can be called stupid.  "Better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than to open it and remove all doubt."

The stupidity isn't confined to Krugman.  There's plenty to around on all sides of the political spectrum.  If nothing good comes from this, it is because those who could do something won't.  They have had plenty of time to do something to prevent these types of occurrences.  Yet these things continue to happen.  What is the solution?  Is anybody actually interested in a solution?  Or are they more interested in using the situation for political cannon fodder?  Rome was said to have been burning while Nero fiddled.  To me, the ideologues will fiddle around while our society burns with problems that can't get solved because no one can do anything about them.  They can't do anything about them because the ideologues will tie us in knots.

Gun control?  I don't believe in gun control, but the fact remains that if this guy couldn't get a gun, he couldn't have done what he did.  I would be very suspicious of any attempt at gun control, but on the other hand, if someone could come up with an idea that could work, or one in which responsibility can be ascertained, I could be persuaded.  I think an ideal solution would allow those who wish to keep their freedoms be the ones who police the system.  I won't favor anything that allows those who wish to reduce us to the status of slaves be the ones who do the regulating.  We have too many foxes in charge of too many chicken coops already.

Notice that I used the word "system".  Yes, you do need a system.  But the system needs to be run by people who are required to think.  A system that has some accountability will allow those who can affix responsibility to do the job needed afterward in case the system fails.  Any system that does less is doomed to failure.  But that could be just the type of system that ideology will produce.  A system that avoids accountability and responsibility.  If that result comes from these types of events, the system can't hold. Stupidity will reign and chaos will rule.

Something needs to change.  I would not favor an ideology to find the change needed.  It will require some intelligence.  That is asking too much of ideology.  Krugman can stand aside.