A Scholarly Ruse

During my two-day training to become a tour guide of the US Capitol, I numbered one of three Congressional Spouses in attendance. My classmates, perhaps 20 more besides, were primarily staffers and personnel from government offices. At one point during the second day, I sat behind a group of three presenters, whose charge it was to familiarize our group with safety procedures in the the Capitol Visitor’s Center. I eavesdropped on their conversation, and was surprised to find at hand, the topic of Congressional Spouses. One asked another if the “2″ Spouses that had been in attendance were still present. Clearly, I had been forgotten or else gone unnoticed. The other responded that they had left on their way to an event luncheon. Still another chimed in, asking how one could tell a Congressional Spouse from anyone else. The answer amused me, not least because it demonstrated just how much a person purports s to know, even when that person knows nothing at all. Knowledge is traded at a premium, and he who is its purveyor, though perhaps rightly deemed the blind leading the blind, nevertheless enjoys the respect of knowing that which others only wonder.  

In truth, it is somewhat difficult to pick out “officially” important persons on Capitol Hill. At a certain point in time, it must have been intended that stately personages wear lapel pins indicating their place in the governmental hierarchy. My partner wears a lapel pin indicating that he is a Congressman, and the appearance of the pin is unmistakable. I fancy that this tradition derives from many an-erstwhile occasion of social gaffers who assumed too much the insignificance of their superiors. When their embarrassments became too much to abide, the institution of pin-wearing was born, or so I imagine.

Now, the image of the pin is well-known and all who pass it in corridors and crowded rooms, pay their respects dutifully. I myelf was issued a pin when I first arrived. Oval-shaped,  whose colors are blue and silver, and depicting our national Eagle, the pin is fashioned to leave doubtless, the identity of its wearer. Yet often, in spite of my pin, I am taken for a staff assistant, or a Congressional aide. I am not embittered by the mistake, and put it down to the youthfulness of my appearance. I should be flattered that others assume I am fresh on the scene. But truthfully, the mistake is, at its least, annoying. When attending an important event, I wish not to be troubled with explaining why I am there and who is my boss. I politely tell the inquisitor that I am a Congressional Spouse, and that I have no boss. Then they apologize all over themselves and walk quickly away. But their assumptions nevertheless remind me that I never know who I am speaking with, whether a head of state or a courtesy clerk, and to presume a person’s importance is the surest way to embarrass oneself.

But let me return to the topic of pins. The tradition being now long-standing, many have discovered that a pin worn upon the lapel is a means of respect. Consequently, one walks through the halls of the US Capitol, and sees nearly every other person sporting lapel jewlery of some kind. It had been a best-kept secret, what now is the commonest parlor trick. What do all these pins mean? Are the wearers truly elected officials, or are they lobbyists proclaiming their organizations? Or is the pin merely cosmetic? With so many people wearing so many pins , it does not surprise me that I am often ignored where my pin is intended to apprise others of my station. 

During my training, the gentleman who asked how to distinguish a Congressional Spouse, was answered by another as follows: “They wear necklaces that show they are Spouses”. How absurd! Not only does the answer assume that all spouses are women, but it is plainly untrue. Spouses are identified, as I have said, by their pins.

Another gentleman got it right: “Spouses wear pins, but I haven’t seen any today”.

Well, I was seated directly behind this individual, and so, while he knew to look for a pin, clearly he had no idea of the pin’s fashion.

Each, in their turn, made a definite statement on Congressional Spouses, and each was incorrect. But each was admired for the so-called knowledge he possessed. I mention the instance now, because it occurs to me how very much people believe they know when, in actuality, they know nothing. It would be harmless, but that followers never stop to think that their teachers may be perpetrators of misinformation. At one time or another, each of us lays confidence in those who seem scholarly. All one needs do to convince the masses, is make statements sweepingly and with seeming certitude. Persuasion is either loud or it is articulate. Whichever you choose, your credentials follow instantly. 

Now, for the bigger picture. It is too easy to dupe the unsuspecting and the incurious. People are eager to believe what they are told. They are too lazy to find out the truth, so welcoming that which only appears to be true. And to those same blind followers who so quickly accept first answers in the guise of authority, the world can be quite the opposite of what they’ve been led to believe.

If a security guard persuades his cohorts that there are no Congressional Spouses in the room, even when one is seated directly behind him,  what does that say about our complacence and our willingness to remain ignorant? Big business relies upon our laziness to accept that which we are told. As it relates to food and the treatment of animals, we are assured that meat is a vital component of the human diet, and that factory-farmed animals are treated humanely. And we believe it! All because the spokespeople spinning lies in our ears, have done so passionately, and eloquently. A lie is a lie, no matter its dress.

I am deeply disturbed by unearned credulity. If we accept one lie, have we not accepted a thousand? What else is pernicious, for which skillful orators have cajoled our approval?  

Think about it before you make your next big decision.