Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt: The tools used to trick you!
Fear. Uncertainty. Doubt.
Whenever someone wants to prevent you from doing something or wants to convince you that you should take a course of action without providing any evidence to support their position these are the weapons and tactics that are used to keep you firmly rooted to your current situation. Any time you find yourself feeling any of these emotions during a political campaign, that’s when it’s time to dig deeper because you aren’t being told the whole story.
In the cityhood proposal for the Stonecrest area we have seen levels of this tactic that rival the presidential race, with proponents for cityhood providing large volumes of peer reviewed data from our state Universities, economic and government impact studies, discussion on talk shows like the Georgia Gang, etc. Over the course of 4 years, the supporters of the plan have had to continuously prove their plan to the state, get support from legislators from all corners of Georgia, get approval and an affirmative vote from both the house and senate of the State of Georgia, and get support and approval from the Governor of the state. Quite simply, the cityhood proposal had to be feasible or else the state wouldn’t allow it to be presented to the people. The opponents of the plan, however, have relied almost exclusively on fear, uncertainty and doubt to convince voters that things should remain as they are, that our area isn’t mature enough to be a city, and far worse – that the proposal would not work because the area lacks diversity (i.e. is too black).
Many vocal opponents of cityhood are quick to call the measure a trick. While they can’t (and won’t) explain why it’s a trick, they are quick to suggest that you don’t know what you’re asking for or that any position other than the status quo is a mistake. In doing so they appeal to the fear that you are going to make your situation worse. But ask yourself, who is really tricking whom? The fact is that The Carl Vinson Institute of the University of Georgia produced several studies to determine the viability of the plan as was required by the state of Georgia. Has the opposition presented an alternative plan that has been reviewed by anyone? No. The opposition has relied on fear. Fear that your taxes might go up (note that property taxes are less than 10% of the proposed city budget). Fear that your homestead exemption might go away (note that it would require the people of the city to vote for any increase). Fear that the schools would be in a worse position (note that the city has absolutely no control over the schools). No facts have been presented to support any of the fears they are suggesting, and there is ample evidence to suggest the fears are unfounded. The only thing the opposition has suggested as a plan is “wait another 10 years and then we might be ready for this.” However, if you go to any meeting where they discuss progress the only thing they will say is “we can’t find the money for improvement” or “the limited progress should be enough – stop asking for what the other cities have.”
Another tactic used is to attempt to make the people uncertain. There is an old saying that “everyone is entitled to their own opinions but not their own facts.” During the drive for Stonecrest, one of the tactics has been to make people uncertain of the facts – to throw in enough uncertainty that the people will not be certain that the facts are indeed facts. Whether it be through the suggestion that the city will be governed by an “unelected committee”, that all of the costs had not been considered, or that the numbers have been adjusted to show that it would work - attempts have been made to distort the facts to make people retreat to their comfort zones of the status quo. The simple fact is that an economic study cannot be commissioned with an end result in mind. A study will either prove a hypothesis or refute it. The first attempt at proving that cityhood was viable was refuted by the Carl Vinson Institute and as a direct result another had to be commissioned (i.e. paid for) a year later. Only after the second study was it possible to show that the City of Stonecrest could be viable. The studies that support the City of Stonecrest are derived from a numerical analysis of the area. There are no politics involved. No favors can be called in. In a study the numbers speak for themselves. If the opponents want to bring their own study and set of facts, they have had every opportunity to do so – but they have not. Instead they want to make the people uncertain of the facts – “trust them”.
The final tactic being employed is by far the most insulting and most heinous as it is an attack on the very people of the area and employs the deplorable tactic of promoting self-doubt. When I first heard the words I didn’t want to believe that they would ever be uttered by another black person, but then I attended a council meeting and heard those words from the very politicians that we are supposed to be waiting on to improve the area – the city won’t work because it’s too black. While Mr. Ed Williams was less direct in his depiction of his position on the matter, calling it ‘lacking diversity’ - the opponents (some in county political office), have had the gall to suggest that this won’t work because this is a predominantly black area. Not since Uncle Ruckus on the Boondocks or Stephen on Django Unchained have I heard black people so vehemently opposed to their own success. The suggestion that we should continue to rely on county government because we can’t do for ourselves harkens back to a time when some suggested to stay on the plantation because surely that was better than what you could do on your own.
Rather than continue to comment on the inane ramblings of a select few fools, I will simply state that business and growth follows opportunity. Business has always followed opportunity. If there is opportunity in an area, a business will enter the area to exploit that opportunity and extract profit. A business is not concerned where the opportunity is so long as the opportunity achieves the goal of extracting profit. What the opponents either refuse to acknowledge or don’t understand is that one must develop opportunities to attract business. This is one of the reasons why the area around Stonecrest has not flourished – there is no economic development plan which is specifically focused for the Stonecrest area. The plan for the City of Stonecrest explicitly focusses on opportunity and assigns money to develop the various corridors and structures within the Stonecrest footprint and in doing so makes the entire region of South Dekalb more economically viable. Opponents to the City of Stonecrest have stated that the people of the area don’t understand this, however I am certainly willing to put forth my Master’s Degree in International Business to assert that I understand it quite well and find that the people who are putting forth the plan understand it quite well as well.
All that said, I didn’t write this opinion piece to get you to support the City of Stonecrest. However, I feel that people need to make an informed decision based on the facts – not the fears, uncertainties, and doubts that the opponents want you to feel. This city has been a project in development for many years, and isn’t something that was decided upon overnight. It took considerable time, sweat, tears, investigations and approvals for it to even get to the point where it is on the ballot. This proposition is a very compelling opportunity for this area, yet it is not without risk. But as Muhammad Ali one stated, “he who is not courageous enough to take risks will accomplish nothing in life”. Are you courageous enough to take the chance?