Memories of the 28th Century

Asperger's Syndrome in a syndrome in individuals that is typified by talking a lot, usually about a favorite subject in one-sided conversations in which the one with Asperger’s will not admit the possibility that he is wrong. People with Asperger’s also lack empathy, do not pick up on social cues and may lack inborn social skills, such as being able to read others' body language, recognize subtle differences in speech tone, pitch, and accent that alter the meaning of others, speech may be flat and hard to understand because it lacks tone, pitch, and accent, be preoccupied with only one or few interests, talk a lot, usually about a favorite subject. One-sided conversations are common. Internal thoughts are often verbalized, and so on. Most people know some people like that. People with Asperger’s can be extremely annoying, but they can also be interesting and hard-working.

It recently occurred to me that this is a syndrome that is shared by many organizations. Sometimes it is appropriate and sometimes it is not. One expects that religions will only talk about their program; although religions try to apply their principles to everything, but that’s to be expected, if they have the truth. But those same characteristics become unpleasant or counter-productive in organizations that are broader in their interests, such as political organizations, youth groups (Boy Scouts, etc.), and especially with educational organizations.

For a number of years political parties have sounded more like religions than political clubs. Until a few years ago political parties had a few general principles, and they applied those general principles to specific situations as the facts and the general atmosphere dictated. Thus it was easy for them to compromise, because their principles were relative, rather than being absolute. But as we saw when Congress assisted in the partial shutdown of the federal government (a good idea in general), it was out of pigheadedness, rather than out of closely held beliefs. Sometimes it appears that the political parties have tied themselves so closely to certain commercial entities that they will do anything that might help those entities and nothing else.

The stalemates that have been going on in the U.S. government provide excellent examples of organizations that think that they have the Truth, and that they should apply their Truth to everyone else. I’m not singling out either major political party, because both have engaged in the same kind of behavior to the misfortune of the American people who are afflicted with taxes that are much higher than necessary and with regulations that tie the hands of the people and give advantages to corporations that ship operations and jobs to other countries, because they have the advantage of being able to sell at U.S. prices goods that were produced by third world people at third world rates of pay. American companies can’t compete, even though American companies produce superior quality goods. I won’t deny the right of people to make money, but the playing field should be level. U.S. companies should not have to obey more regulations that increase costs that are not also costs of their foreign competition. Such regulations and tax policies are products of both Republicans and Democrats working alternately to assist their respective adherents.

It wasn’t long ago when political parties put the interests of the country as a whole at the top of their agendas, but it may be ideology, or it may be money, but now a narrow set of principles are first inline. It would be nice if we could be confident that it was ideology, rather than money that was driving that political parties, but that make it more certain that they had Asperger’s Syndrome, and there is no treatment for that syndrome.

Even more disturbing than political parties becoming like religions are the social and educational organizations that are also becoming adamantly ideological. Sometimes they do so in reaction to local issues, and sometimes it appears to be imposed on the oganization byt officers. We all want our opinions to matter, but imposing one's will on other people is not polite. Giving others the opportunity to discover that one's opinions are superior is much more appropriate to civilized people engaging in civil discourse.

Then there are the issues that have become religious in style.