Turning a sow’s ear into a silk purse seldom succeeds

Pointing out the obvious seldom works, either.

That so many American institutions have tried to take low life Americans and turn them into bright shining citizens is so American noble. That so many institutions have failed, or suffered from the law of unintended consequences, is a realistic appraisal of what has happened since the Vietnam era, circa the 1960’s.

And let us be certain about what a low life might not be. The circumstances of one’s birth, as in poor or not well off financially does not make a low life. The circumstances of where one lives or goes to school does not make a low life. Whether one is a first generation American, or more old school, does not make a low life. A low life is rather just a normal circumstance of life, as in a certain percentage of any society are low lifes. And whether the reasons are inherited, or situational, is of little interest to most, except for those Americans who want to turn sow’s ears into silk purses.

That so many institutions in America have tried to convert low lifes has, in the end, been detrimental to the institutions. Be it failures, or the law of unintended consequences, the institutions have suffered for their noble efforts.

Let’s name names. The military decades ago, increased its allowed percentage of Mental Group IV (the lowest mental group) acceptable candidates as part of changing America for the better, and making quota along the way. Our civilian leaders had much to do with this, by the way. As a Marine, we just knew our training methods and band of brothers ideas would change anyone for the better. Well, we failed, and leaders usually spent 90% of their time on 10% of their Marines, all too often low lifes. Finally we had a Commandant who started an expeditious discharge program to rid ourselves of these people, and things began to turn around almost immediately. The good Marines saw what was happening, and went home and told people, and we are the beneficiaries today. An analogy for today’s political leaders is obvious: if they focus 90% of their time on good Americans, they will be surprised as to the results.

While not a low life issue, the idea of affirmative action for Negroes has suffered from the law of unintended consequences. What started out as a noble idea has been abused into a quota excuse for screwing fellow Americans out of jobs, and frustrating so many Negroes enough to where even I would think racism is going on. And I taught at Atlanta University for three years, plus I have 6 years of recruiting experience. First on frustrating so many young Americans who have gained access to advanced education and subsequent leadership positions. By using double acceptance standards, like college admission scores, so many kids have been set up in ways not to their advantage, and so many have been frustrated later just after school, when they have to compete with peers who started out with advantages, and have built on their advantages. None of this is racial, just human. But when students enter a law school, for example, and have to compete with peers better prepared by life and circumstances, they, those who got in by double standards, often get beat out. So what is new, except that some Americans well intended policy has made things worse in the end. And the problem amplifies if a customer thinks their lawyer (or doctor or military lieutenant) is a “quota baby”, and shy away from them. None of this is racial, just human. Now I buy the “diamond in the rough” idea, but I expect to deal with diamonds in the end.

Another down side of affirmative action is screwing fellow Americans out of jobs otherwise earned fair and square by the merits and the costs. For those benefiting because of racial quotas, or those using the system to hire black shadow companies to then benefit, the backlash is coming. There is no free lunch, and since no one alive today has anything to do with slavery, and few have much to do with Jim Crow laws in the South, the whole idea is a failing idea. ‘Mend it, don’t end it” is a quaint phrase that mollifies few. How about our American benefits to include quality and a good fair price?

Companies come and go. So do political parties. So do main stream churches. And so do American educational institutions. At one time I believe Notre Dame was considered to be an American intellectual capital. Now that mantra in the recent decades has been passed to the Ivy League schools. Based on American performance and results, many are not sure why, but that is just as things seem now. But as these Ivy League institutions have changed, all too often in the pursuit of changing sow’s ears into silk purses, and bringing in low lifes, while well intended, will drag them down much like the military decades ago. This argument will probably fall on deaf ears until the financial and government jobs for their graduates disappear in the near future. The hirers may expect more, and go to other schools as a start point. Based on performance, this is probably good for America. In the meantime, so many of our Ivy League kids are getting screwed and will bitter about it. The only ones who may not be as bitter will be the low lifes who got in, mostly by being low lifes recruited by an idealistic school with good intentions.

It takes being older to remember when Black Panther types were invited to New York City cocktail parties hosted by the then trendy types, and it was recorded and reported in the national press. No one hears anything about these people anymore, suggesting a human outcome is underway.

Where do we go from here? The assumption is that government policy and jobs may still count. And it may. Many Americans will be surprised to learn how many of our “leaders” are hired, or appointed, as well as their “experience level” in government, be it in the federal Executive or the federal Congress. Some may be more derogatory, and think of them as managers at best. In all cases, it seems silly to hear Senators talk about management experience when their present Senate staff may consist of, say, 65 hired staffers. And this is just the “personal” staff, who really do much of the work and budgeting and even law writing. Some have Senate committee staffs, like foreign policy, which may have 200 plus hired staffers. The point is many of these hired leaders are from the aforementioned system. Is that what we Americans want. And do we know they are having their politician voting for their multi-million dollar gyms, for example. Is this is what American is about?

We must vote for politicians who will focus on the 90% of we good Americans. We need a lot of care and help, too. The well intended, often infatuation with the lower life 10%, needs to fade in perspective. At best, they rate 10% of our political effort.