Masquerade

Picture an 18th century Versailles masquerade ball or the climactic scene in the classic movie To Catch a Thief starring Cary Grant and Grace Kelly, wherein the guests are wearing costumes with elaborate masks. In the movie, the mask hid identities, adding to the intrigue of the plot. In the court of King Louis XVI, people were pretentious to the point of absurdity. They actually believed that they were who they pretended to be. They were masquerading in denial of reality.

In both of these plots, ball guests violated the ancient adage inscribed on the walls of the Saint Sophia Cathedral Museum in Istanbul, Turkey: “Appear to be what you are or be what you appear to be.” Shakespeare would have said it was much ado about nothing. For whatever reason, history has confirmed that leaders of society often play games to persuade people to their way of thought through subterfuge. ​

Take the recent Republican presidential debates hosted by CNBC.  There has been much criticism and outcry about the partisan environment projected by the moderators. Partisanship was the third least insult. And by insult I do not mean to the Republican candidates, I mean to the viewing audience. Forty percent of the American public today define themselves not as Republican or Democrat, but as Independent. They are looking for unbiased, non-partisan analysis they can trust based on facts and truths rather than the end-game conclusion of the advocate.

The first and most grievous insult by the moderators was the shallowness of the questions. This was supposed to be a forum about budgets, cost of programs, and finances in general. The subtitle of the debate promotions was ‘your money matters.’ There were a few questions on taxes and policy programs, but money matters were not the central theme. There was not one single question about international economics and how it impacts the average American citizen, nothing about globalization of financial markets, nothing about Chinese currency manipulation and the overvalued Yuan, nothing about Vladimir Putin and his Russian meddling in international affairs, nothing about the Middle East and the price of oil, nothing about environmental controls and the cost of regulations, nothing about the increased cost of the implementation of Obama Care and its impact on state budgets, and nothing about Democrat programs for more free stuff like college tuition, paid parental leave and how Republicans would reject or accommodate those programs.

At one time, the panelists had worked for the Wall Street Journal and other financial news services. They were aware of these world economic issues. CNBC as a network airs programs dealing with the complex in-depth issues of global finances. The United States of America is the largest economy in the world. The dollar is the world’s reserve currency. One would think that a reputable financial news network would want to discern for the public how the next leader of the free world would view and propose to implement international economic policy to the benefit and stability of the average American citizen.

The second most egregious insult to the American public was that they actually participated in the debate and argued with the candidates. Moderators should never inject themselves into the debate. They can make their concerns apparent in their questions. Tough questions are fine. But the moderators went beyond this and stated their own opinions as to what they believed right answers were. If they want to state their opinions in reference to a set of facts, then they should run for office and stand on the stage. They have forgotten or ignored the meaning of the term ‘moderator.’ The purpose of a moderator is to set before the American people the facts and facilitate in the presentations of the candidates’ options for future government policy. Their purpose is not to tell the American people their opinions on whether the candidates’ answers are right or wrong.

Now why would they act in this manner? Did the marketing department of CNBC tell them to turn the debate into a reality show to enhance ratings and afterglow? Are they so arrogant in their perceived intellect that they had to correct the candidates if they didn’t agree with their answers? Possibly it is both. They certainly prepared in advance for the presentation of questions to the candidates. The strategy had to be based on something. The shallowness of the questions was negligent on their part. They must have assumed wrongly that the American public didn’t want to hear and could not handle macroeconomic questions. The insertion of their opinions may have been a result of their arrogance. It is hard to imagine any research that indicated the viewing audience desired to hear their opinions based upon the candidates answers.

They were masquerading like Louis’ guests at a French masquerade ball. They were hiding their true intentions and at the same time believing who they really are is what society wants if only they could take off their mask. An incredible paradox when you think about it.

Those who are unserved are the seeking unled 40 percent who truly want to support sound American government policy for the generations. The American business model is proven to be the foundation of sound global economic development and finances — large business working in concert with small business to produce capital formation, innovation, and job creation through principled free enterprise. Yes, the poor must be served. Minorities must be protected. Wall Street must be regulated. All ideas must have a free and open forum. But in principled free enterprise, small business is allowed to prosper without over regulation. Large business is allowed to grow in reference to foreign policy and government-to-government economic treaties. Social policy can be managed without violating individual pursuit of happiness. Eternal principles can allow for the structure of all of society’s needs.

What is needed is for all leaders with channels of access for information, whether elected, or business, or academic, or in media, to stop the masquerade.

Trust the American people to make the right decision for their own families and their children’s future when given all of the honest relevant facts.

My name is Marc Nuttle and this is what I believe.

What do you believe?