Self deception

I have theory. Reading often takes place from an altitude of 35,000 feet. From this distance we may be able to make out landmarks; but we’re prone to missing one or two features that can lead us into incomprehensible territory. I admit, when it happens to me I usually walk away blaming the author. However, sometimes I’ll go back and find what it is I may have missed. Today was such as occasion. I have an interest in what goes on in Nevada because I have a friend living there who is politically active. So, I’m reading an article about unions representing Vegas Casinos ..like the culinary union and the gaming union. It’s a big issue because of what happened in Wisconsin yesterday. Anyway, it’s talking about a company called Station Casinos that owns a string of casinos that aren’t union. An immediate image of several big strip Casinos comes to mind and I get the impression they’re a big player. Now I’m reading to find out what they’ve been doing right to keep their employees happy and uninterested in voting union. What came next stopped making sense. Why are they engaged in an ugly battle with the unions ..? What went wrong ..? And who’s giving the unions any odds of winning in a state like Nevada ..especially after what happened in Wisconsin? Does this writer know what he’s talking about ..? Should I give my friend a call ..? I left to go do something else and when I came back, decided to give it a second look. Sure enough, I found the culprit and it was me. A sentence that I thought had said:

“The company Station owns several casinos that cater to Vegas residents playing at the high-rolling big strip casinos.”

actually said:

“The company Station owns several casinos that cater to Vegas residents …leaving the high-roller tourist trade to big strip casino (operators)”

This re-frames my comprehension, turning Station into a small time player ..catering to Vegas residents who play,  like ..bingo and slot machines off the strip. The unions have targeted them precisely because they are small and vulnerable. Like adjusting the focus on a pair of binoculars, the narrative comes into resolution.

Irreconcilable narratives

“The man who lets a leader prescribe his course is a wreck being towed to the scrap heap. It is the innovators, outside the status quo, who carry mankind forward.” Ayn Rand

I came across the following narrative in the paper this morning. I guess it’s a better example of ‘contradiction’ than ‘deception’ but it sounded jarring. If the Republican Party doesn’t admit there’s a fundamental contradiction going on here ..then they’re being genuinely dishonest. First, I hear the GOP say “we are willing to make tough choices to reduce federal deficits, limit spending, lower taxes and put the country on a better financial footing” [ link ]. Which leads me to believe they’re serious about reducing the size and expense of government. Then I hear Gingrich say: “..what I’ve been trying to do is in the tradition of Kennedy, which is to take very large ideas and try to get America moving again.” To accomplish this he pledges to: “..put colonies on the moon .. reshape the geopolitical landscape.. and put $2.50 per gallon gas in every tank” [ link ]. Now my prior belief that Republicans are serious about reducing the size and expense of government has been blown all to hell. He goes on to say: “I’m a visionary with big ideas that candidly, my opponents can’t comprehend” and paraphrases Proverbs 29:13 saying “You need a visionary leader with very big, bold ideas ..without vision, the people perish” [ link ]. And there goes my belief that Republicans value individual initiative. It sounds like he’s saying political leaders are better stewards of economic progress. I think there’s danger in confusing visionaries like Steve Jobs with visionaries running for political office. I’m not sure I’m ready to replace captains of industry with leaders of state.