Positively Negative

The 1970s did us a grave disservice besides promoting powder blue and chocolate brown as a desirable color combo. The 1970s told us that negativity is bad. The 2000s did it again. I seriously doubt any economists read this blog, so you’ll have to forgo the geopolitical implications. The point is that negative was considered a bad thing to be.

Yes, yes, yes, of course “negative” means “bad” colloquially. Wait for it.

The problem is all those chirpy “look on the bright side” / “there are no problems, only challenges” people. Want to piss Auntie off? Use the word “challenge” when you mean that something is a problem.

When negative things happen, you’re forced to decide either that they don’t matter or to deal with them. Notice that I didn’t say “bad” just there. That’s to distinguish between an unfortunate situation and genuine misfortune, in much the same way that I would distinguish between being temporarily depressed and clinical Depression.

Not everything that happens to us in the course of an ordinary day is good. No matter how insignificant they are, when things that are not-good pile up unleavened by the tiniest bit of goodness, we can become negative. Those happy-go-lucky 1970s people would chide us for that. They would be wrong.

Negativity is a good motivator. Burning off anger or resentment can get you through a lot of chores you might otherwise procrastinate. Being negative can help you realize that most of what bothers you is irrelevant or trivial. Unless of course it does the opposite, in which case you’re more likely to address it than to let it all continue. Thus negativity becomes positive in effect. That’s a Birkenstock up the patootie of a perky 1970s person.

Think about it this way, what if we could channel PMS as an alternative energy source? Now that’s an idea with some serious geopolitical implications.