Our election is now over. The hard part of the next era in American history starts today. Challenges abound for President Obama and for us, the American people. Right here, right now is where individually and communally we need to figure out how to put knowledgeable compassion back into our lives and into our governmental institutions.
In e-mails and conversations both before and after the election I have stated without apology or hesitation that I am a socialist. Make no mistake I am a socialist in the broadest sense of small s socialism. Had I been alive in the era I would have been out there with the Diggers on St. Georges Hill.
My belief is that the community I live should be a place where we insure the welfare of the common person without killing the spark of the entrepreneur or the innovator. Individuals should be rewarded for achievement but no one should be left to starve or wanting the basics of medical care.
We are charged with maintaining an environment where our food and water are pure enough to be consumed without deleterious impact on our health. We are changed with setting aside some portion of our individual wealth (goods, food, money and medicines) to insure that all members of our community receive at least a modicum of sustenance and care. Our capacity to think, feel, empathize, sympathize and plan requires us to take the next step in evolution and reject the notion that the weak must be shunted aside in the pursuit of individual gratification.
It would be easy to say that for the past eight years George Bush and his government have ignored the needs of the poorest and feeblest among. It would be easy to say that for the past eight years we have looked the other way and let the rich plunder our way of life through deals cut without transparency in the darkened halls of our nation’s Capitol. But this evil has gone on for quite a bit longer than that. Neither of our institutionalized political parties has really acted in a way that is truly compassionate and caring.
The meaning of this election is very, very simple. It isn’t about the economy. It isn’t about the color of the person taking control of the executive branch. It isn’t about who was or should have been on the ticket of a particular party. What it is about is that enough people have looked at where we are and have found it wanting. Change is the key to what has happened. The results of the election show a desire for a better and more honorable government. This is about a desire for a more responsive and just government. The choice made at the polling booths of this country was about a nation wanting to move back into balance caring for the least among us and working together with a common purpose. It is about moving away from the I've got the biggest pile of toys mentality. It is about leaving the I am going to heaven and you the godless are going to hell mentality.
Obama is not Moses, Jesus, Buddha, the Prophet or even a reasonable facsimile. The Democrats are not the apostles. The Republicans are not Lucifer’s Legion of the Fallen. They, me, you we are just Americans. We have a chance here in this period of transition, a transition that we as a people have asked for, to recommit to the ideals of community and caring, of respect and fairness that made this country the amazing place of hope that it once was.
6 comments:
Ahhh. Such an optimist.
Remind me again...........by whom are you employed??
Keep your dobber up!
It is not the governments job to care for the needy yet, from your writing, I get the impression that you feel that way. Fact is, the government bureaucracy bungles everything it gets it's greedy paws on. That is an indisputable fact. We all need to step up and help those who need it. Take time, money whatever and give it. Personal commitment to service works, inept and expensive government programs don't.
We, as a people, need to take responsibility for each other. Does that sound like a pipe dream? No more so than your dream of an honest (just) and efficient (responsive) government (an oxymoron if I ever heard one). You keep on dreaming Jay and so will I. In the meantime I will continue my own efforts in pursuit of my goal. I wonder how efficiently the Government will pursue yours?
This blog entry sounds like it was written by a naive, idealistic collegian. You feel for it hook line and sinker didn't you. I hope you don't get too disappointed when you realize you aren't wearing any clothes.
PS I promise I won't laugh
Susan,
One of the things that make a democracy work is the interplay of ideas. Clearly you and I differ on what role that government can and should play in the care of its citizens. It is comforting to know however that we can have a discussion on the role of government and about our ideologies and still be friends. Sometimes I wonder if most of the people in our nation have become so polarized that they could not.
You are not alone among the people that I count as close and dear friends who are suspicious of the government’s ability to do anything positive with our tax dollars. Many of the folks that I am thinking of believe that the government will muck up pretty much anything it touches. Normally the arguments take one of two paths, or a combination of both. These are in order, governmental workers are lazy thieves and two, large means inefficient.
Most of those people that I know assume that a government worker does nothing, except maybe suck away hard earned money from the citizenry by forced robbery, which is named taxation. Up until eight years ago when I went to work for the Michigan Department of State I didn’t even contemplate the work ethic of my governmental officials. However the second you put on a state name tag you become fair game for the gibes and jokes that many people direct at you. The punch line is repeatedly something that emphasizes s government employee must be incompetent, lazy and dishonest.
Let me state unequivocally that the vast majority of my fellow state/government workers are not inefficient and do try and provide the best service and effort they can. (Well, there was one exception but he retired. I hear he prowls about on the internet these days being a pundit). Many of us put in extra hours beyond what is called for in our job descriptions. We make the extra phone call to try and help that person with the offbeat problem that will fall between the cracks otherwise. Our work product is subject to repeated review. We do engage in education to hone our skills. We do care and we work hard to give the people value for their dollars.
Sure there is some deadweight in the ranks of government workers. It happens. Any large organization with have people who don’t pull their weight. I worked a number of years for AIG and there were people there to that I was sure must have had photos of someone higher up misbehaving in Tijuana because they still held a job even with no discernable talent. But the deadweight in government is a small, small percentage.
Most governments are working with 1/3rd to ½ less in the way of employee numbers now than were present four years ago. With the economy tanking that number won’t expand even with Obama the Socialist coming into office. I have heard the term “Do more with less” so many times now I am numb. The people working for you on your tax dollars by and on the whole want to do what is required of them and what is best for you. We are trying to get it right.
There are social programs that worked well historically, Vista, Foster Grandparents, and Job Corps to name a few. There are some that don’t. I am sure you have your own list. But it is also clear that the private sector so rabidly embraced by the right acting in the supposedly free market unfettered by regulation does not act in a way that benefits anyone other that a select few. Can we say Enron, AIG, Countrywide, Bear Sterns and the list goes on and on.
I bet for every government program you can name that has failed or has corrupt employees or has bought an overpriced toilet seat I can come up with a private sector firm whose CEO spent 2.8 million on a birthday tea in an exotic locale while his (or her) company was tanking. (Hey we could create a website called Counterbalancing Excess where your task is to match an egregious private sector act to an egregious public sector one). Think about the excessive pay and golden parachutes that each of these companies lavished on their leaders many of whom will walk away without liability under law. And then there are those companies that simply abuse the American people and their wallets by profiteering in a time of war, Profiteering made possibly by questionable connections with the Republican government elite. Halliburton stands out in particular with its various no bid subject to no accounting or audit contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan. Blackwater with its Amway ties is right in there also.
I guess what I am saying is that we need to be focusing some of our collective wealth on people in need, people who are a much larger part of our population than they were at the start of Ronald Regan’s first term in office. Regan was of course the standard bearer for the cry of deregulation. We can hold government accountable if it is squandering our money. It is hard and troublesome but we can do it. Yes we do have to act individually to care for one another. But I think we stand a better chance of having government aid us than we do of having the free market help those among us in need. Sick and poor people just don’t add much to the bottom line.
G Manitou
PS You can laugh, I am okay with that.
You prove once again G-Man that you are a better man than I.
You take the time, effort and thought to post a well-reasoned 921-word response to Susan where I would have used 5, 2 of which would have been "f---ing idiot" and 3 of which would have been "You" "are" "a".
Yes Richard, G Manitou is certainly a better man than you are...but that is not a hard thing to do.
Post a Comment