A great dichotomy grips our social interaction. On the one hand we are taught—by our parents, in school, and through every cultural and consumerist message—that the world is divided into experts and the rest of us. Those leaders we vote into power by such dubious “democratic” process know what’s in our best interests. We are conditioned to ignore the fact that so many of them are bought and paid for by commercial or geopolitical interests. We believe they truly have the interests of their constituencies at heart. Our military leaders know how important it is that we win, win, win. Our educational experts never tire of testing, testing, testing. Our medical professionals know what’s best for our health. In short, the learned suits and ties with the most degrees and prizes know the answers to the most crucial questions of the day.
And speaking of questions, we are discouraged from asking any, at least not the most important, or too many, or those that move beyond the paradigm of what has been deemed acceptable. From our earliest years, we are pushed to memorize, take tests, and accept a storehouse of information that keeps us from exploring outside the box, discourages forays into areas where the answers are not easy givens. The experts have the answers. All we need do is mimic them. Independent thought is discouraged in US public education over the past several decades, which is why the United States is ranked 33rd in education in the world, below nations as diverse as Korea, Finland, Greece, Mexico, Japan and France.
When it comes to our health, we are also encouraged to leave it to the experts. These range from accomplished men and women whose studies and experience genuinely prepare them to take on our wellness issues, to the pharmaceutical company commercials that urge us to ask our doctor “if such and such a medication is right for you,” and even including the latest digital app such as Dr. Phil’s Dial-A-Doc. Contemporary medical models limit time with patients, make asking questions and discussing problems more and more difficult, and favor cost-effective one-size-fits-all remedies. The important thing is that the expert knows it all and we as lay people know nothing.
Authority reigns.
An intentionally complex use of language, including words and concepts unfamiliar to the ordinary person, fortifies this reverence for authority. It also shames us into not asking questions. How often have we been swept along by the opinions of supposed experts, who use words we don’t understand—whether they are medical professionals (both allopathic and alternative), professors, automobile mechanics, roofers, or news anchorpersons? They, after all, “know what they’re talking about.”
But do they?
I am not writing this to dis all experts, many of whom have earned my deepest respect. I count myself fortunate to have been mentored by some, to learn from the writing and art of others, and to enjoy the ongoing privilege of intellectual exchange with yet others. At pivotal moments wise women and men have given me great gifts, no few of which have quite literally saved my life.
But I am struck by how often misinformation and outright lies pass for expert information. We are not trained to “follow the money,” by which I mean follow the results of studies or other widely disseminated information to the institutional interests of those behind their findings. If we examine the interests at stake, it isn’t hard to separate serious conclusions from those fabricated to support a particular product or skewed tendency.
I was motivated to write this rumination after listening to V.B. Price’s illuminating interview with Dan Hancock. Once a week, New Mexico Mercury’s Insight New Mexico series brings us probing discussion with a political figure or someone knowledgeable about a field that concerns us: who are our choices for New Mexico’s next governor, the situation of water in our dry state, histories we should know, conversations with Albuquerque’s little known intellectual giants or cultural icons. Hancock knows more about nuclear energy in our state than anyone; for many years he has been studying it and has been at the forefront of demanding it be safe. This week Price asked him to explain what is really going on at WIPP.
Hancock is a true expert. He knows a lot, but doesn’t pretend to have all the answers. He owes allegiance to no one but our citizenry. His assessment of the accident that took place at WIPP on February 14 2013 is grave. And he offers perspective on the lack of information, misinformation, and lies told by the Department of Energy and other officials.
Yes, lies.
Radiation leaks and exposure were not supposed to happen at WIPP. The experts convinced a gullible public they would never happen. Yet they have. Not only was one group of workers exposed; those workers were sent home believing their exposure was within safe limits, only to unknowingly contaminate their cars, homes, and people close to them. Then, unbelievably (if one trusts the experts), another group of workers was allowed to enter the underground site the following day. Misinformation about the nature and degree of contamination has changed with every new disclosure, every town hall meeting or authoritative press release.
Hancock admits that behind such misinformation is a reluctance to cause panic. He too is not interested in causing panic. But he points out that solid information, partial as it may be, makes precautionary measures possible. The production, stockpiling, and particularly the safe disposal of plutonium and other elements of nuclear energy are ongoing problems in the US and the world. Yet humans continue to produce and stockpile nuclear warheads, and seek safe ways of disposing of spent uranium whose shelf life is figured in the tens of thousands of years.
There are so many unanswered questions here: how to truly stop a nuclear arms race in which tens of thousands have died, and hundreds of thousands more have been disfigured or produced deformed offspring. Where accidents have affected land and water and food for generations into the future. Where plants in which nuclear power has been harnessed for peacetime energy have fallen like playing cards, from Three Mile Island to Chernobyl to Fukushima Daiichi. What can humanity do about a problem that has slipped through its fingers and reached a point where it seems impossible to put the genie back in the box?
Don Hancock doesn’t have the answers and neither do I. But one thing is clear: we will not find even a partial answer until our experts stop lying, until they begin to tell us a truth that will give us some insight into the terrible acts being perpetrated in our names, allow us some real say in those issues that so deeply affect our lives and our children’s lives, and give us an informed place at the table in regard to future discussion and decisions.
Nuclear energy is but one of the issues that hangs in the balance here. It is a dramatically important one, but there are many others: climate change, water, war, violence safe production of foods, healthcare, education, government, poverty, finance—the list is dauntingly long.
More daunting, though, is the way in which authority has become confused with expertise, and shameless lies so often stand in for “truth.” Until we learn to think for ourselves, we will not be able to disentangle presumed from real knowledge. Until we learn to question what we are told by a roster of so-called experts, we are doomed to robotic acceptance of our place in a disintegrating society. And until we learn to challenge authority, we will not be able to begin, collectively, to find the answers we need.
(Image credit: Cory Doctorow)
Responses to “Authority and the Art of Lying”