Are maritime park supporters drunk on Groupthink?

In every group, someone has to be the Anti-Groupthink advocate. In reading the near-delirious interpretations by pundits and maritime park supporters of the Local Option Sales Tax (LOST) referendum, I see it’s time to ask the partygoers to put down their champagne glasses and sober up a little.

If this is your first exposure to the concept, Groupthink is the term coined by psychologist Irving I. Janis to describe, “The psychological drive for consensus at any cost that suppresses disagreement and prevents the appraisal of alternatives in cohesive decision-making groups.”

It occurs when individuals become so obsessed with the need to be a team player, that they become afraid to ask, “Is there another interpretation of events, or possible outcome of future events, that is so repugnant to what we want to believe that we either discount those possibilities to nothingness, or worse, deny that those other possible outcomes even exist?”

It’s not hard to understand why a person doesn’t want to be the anti-groupthink advocate. You suffer ridicule, demeaning snideness that hurts and ostracizes, and in these parts, the “You’re negative!” tattoo. Insulted rather than consulted is a good summary.

So, knowing that anti-Groupthink advocacy means putting my invitation to be a member of the local power players’ Irish Politicians Club into the Social Register’s deep freeze, I’ll advocate anyway, and tearfully suffer the lost invitation in solitude.

Why did LOST win? The giddy gabbers want to believe it is because a) the so-called “negatives” are over-represented in the public’s mind vis-à-vis their true percentage of the population, and b) area residents just underwent an epiphany, defined by Webster as, “an illuminating discovery, a revealing scene, or moment.”

And what is this epiphany? That it’s smart to vote “yes” for so-called “positive” proposals whether it’s higher taxes, or the maritime park. In fact, it’s not only smart, but now residents will be lemming-like followers who drop everything to pass these proposals.

OK, reality checks time.

First, the turnout for the LOST vote was less than 20 percent. Researchers will tell you low voter turnout occurs when voters – as a whole - consider an issue as unimportant. The lopsided nature of the results doesn’t change that reality.

The real vote to watch was that 8 of 10 voters decided the issue was meaningless in their life. The message of their absence is, “Whether it passes or not, it doesn’t affect my life enough to make it worth changing my daily routine by even a few minutes to go to the polls.”

Even if you write off 40 percent of the total voters as the percentage that never vote on anything, the “it’s meaningless” absence beat the “it matters” turnout by 2-1, a landslide victory for meaningless.

Second, and infinitely more important, is that LOST was safe; safe because it is restricted to particular uses, which means distrusted politicians can’t waste it, and its burden on voters won’t result in personal financial gain for anyone.

What these realities mean to maritime park supporters is that there is no relationship between the LOST proposal and the park proposal, because people see waterfront development highly affecting their life, and subject to uncertainty in its outcome.

Park advocates see it increasing downtown property owners’ land values – and thus the city’s tax base, business owners’ revenues and employment, entrepreneurial investment opportunities, and providing a better quality of life.

But opponents see it as depriving them of open waterfront access, risk-free allocation of tax revenues, setting up certain disaster with the next big hurricane, and a naked power play for personal enrichment using public money.

I’m going to vote yes on this issue, because I want a multi-use park, know capitalism is all about rewards for taking risks, want student-level jobs so we can start building an employment pool of graduates prepared to take high paying jobs from employers recruited to the area who require advanced education or technical skills, and am not going to let fears dictate my life’s direction.

But I won’t be joining the Irish Politicians Club members at their latest political bacchanalia; I quit drinking 16 years ago, and I’m not going to approach this vote drunk on the idea it’s already a done deal.
-30-