Don’t confuse Moral Outrage with Vitality

By Zachary Alexander on

Vitality is more sustainable than moral outrage. This is not to say that vitality doesn’t wane. Everything becomes commonplace overtime. Vitality can be reinvigorated by proximity to other vitality. It can be replenished through outreach. On the other hand outrage, actually numbs all but the most fervent supporters. Outrage is a game of diminishing returns. It doesn’t work unless new outrages are periodically exposed.

The best example of an outrage movement is the Tea Party. It grew out a desire to defeat the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Tea Party members channeled outrage to take over both the Republican Party and the House of Representatives. The problem is that Tea Party members have had to make cataloging outrages their primary mission. They can afford to do that because they are better situated to compete in mid-term elections.

When the people re-elected President Barack Obama, they repudiated the outrage against the Affordable Care Act and should have signaled an end to the debate. In an odd twist of fate, post-globalists are the ones most at risk of losing ground after the 2012 election. Too many Democrats take the mid-term elections off and only respond to the outrages of the Republican Party once they are in control of government functions.

A better pro-growth strategy would be to adopt a new course of action like Post-Globalism because it changes not only the direction. It also changes the vehicles that take you there. Post-Globalism helps the United States complete in the 21 century by transitioning the economy from market-oriented to network-oriented. Moreover, it represents something more than a simple act of moral outrage.

Zachary Alexander