A major dividing line between
Progressives and Centrists is the issue of individual responsibility. Are people responsible for their fate in life,
or do social forces determining life’s fate?
The divide is not either or, but rather which view is
primarily used to organize American society.
Is it best organized by creating a society that emphasizes individual
choice with the nuclear family as the basic unit of society? Or best organized by an all for one and one
for all view, where, it takes a village, is the basic unit of society?
America, founded on the principle of
individual freedom, created a government and legal system emphasizing
individual responsibility and free choice. One of Government’s primary duties is to ensure the
individual’s inalienable rights to life and liberty, enforced through a justice
system protecting individual rights from government and/ or individuals
attempting to deny them these rights.
Progressive perspective reshapes the
justice system into emphasizing social forces over individual
responsibility. Justice, blind to an
individual’s station in life, is replaced by a societal perspective, where combating the
ills and inequities in society form the structure of the judicial system. Some of the extreme recommendations flowing
from the Progressive perspective are disquieting and disturbing to Centrist America -- defund the police or reimagine them as social workers, require
reduced or no bail with less or no regard to a person’s behavior or criminal history, and eliminate
the penitentiary system. All these
recommendations logical consequences of believing the criminal justice system
is the instrument of a corrupt society.
There is fascinating research showing that babies’ are born with a built in sense of fairness which undergirds a moral code based on individual responsibility. Babies as young as three months distinguish between selfish and greedy, fair and unfair behavior. When given a choice, babies prefer to gaze at a puppet who acts morally than one who is selfish or greedy, in the same way they prefer to look at pictures of their mother rather than of a stranger.
The importance of individual responsibility underlies the angry reactions when criminals
released by Progressive D.A.s commit violent acts or when police are restrained
by Progressive mayors from acting when rioters attack others and/or loot and
burn community businesses. These
reactions transcend party lines. They
don’t see people who are victims of society.
They see people who lack decency and a concern for others.
Parents teach the importance of personal responsibility when raising children. They teach their children to
take ownership of their lives, and that they are accountable for the good and
bad consequences of their choices.
Parents praise children for their accomplishments and hard work. They also teach their children not to make
excuses or blame others for their actions and to say they are sorry to those
they harmed.
That is
why parents reacted so strongly when made aware of their children being
taught concepts in school going against the grain of individual
responsibility. So strong, it overcame
the inertia of not attending or speaking out at school board meetings. I had an equally strong reaction when
introduced to the concept that my “whiteness” makes me a racist. For me, racism is about an individual’s
belief of the inferiority of people of color.
Now I am told racism is about skin color, the very standard I, and the
dictionary, use for determining racism.
Most outrageous, as a white Jew, being defined as a racist aligns me with White
Supremacists, the very group that wants to eliminate me and my kind from the
face of the earth. When White
Supremacists chant, “you will not replace us”, the message is directed towards Jews as much as it is to people of color.
Progressives use equity as the
measuring stick for racial injustice by pointing out that blacks fare
disproportionately poorer in key measures of wellbeing. Blacks have disproportionately less access to
healthcare, more incidences of serious medical issues, poorer quality of
education, lower levels of academic achievement, shorter life spans, less
access to supermarkets, higher drug usage, higher incarceration rates, and so
on.
While all true, these comparisons
neglect to consider socioeconomic status, which is at the root of these
disparities. Poor white communities show
the same disadvantages. Poor white
children suffer the same fate as their poor minority counterparts. A poor white child attends inferior schools,
is less likely to finish high school, more likely to commit crimes, more likely
to become a drug addict, have a shorter life span, etc.
Progressives do no focus on or promote programs
which provide skill sets so the poor can lift themselves out of poverty. To do so would acknowledge the poor, through
individual effort, can improve their lot in life. Instead Progressives focus on instances where
an unarmed minority is killed by a white police officer. Although touted by Progressives as evidence
of systemic racism, the reality is that white officers killing unarmed
minorities is so rare that calling it systemic is a libelous distortion of the
truth.
The media coverage of a white officer killing a minority does not include
statistics showing the rarity of police killing unarmed minorities, or provide comparable coverage of the killing of unarmed whites.
The Washington Post for the last 6 years tracked the number of killings
of unarmed civilians. During that time
period police officers across the country responded to tens and tens of
millions of calls. Of those calls, 478
ended in an unarmed civilian being killed.
Within that subset of unarmed civilian killings, 175 were white, 137
were black, and 79 were Hispanic. These
numbers are not even a blip compared to the number of civilian encounters with
the police over that time period, and show no significant disparity in which skin color is victimized.
The largest beneficial impact for the inner cities would be to address the social dysfunction occurring in those areas, where the overwhelming number of homicides occur, along with all manner of social dysfunction. There is a mantra for success in life my father shared with my son when he was 13, the age of transition from childhood to adulthood in the Jewish faith. He said to him, “get educated, get a job, get married, and have children … in that order”. Nothing fancy or profound, but a time tested formula used by citizens and immigrants alike in achieving success in America. Implementing programs based on that formula would go a long way to breaking the cycle of poverty existing in the inner cities. It will require a lot of resources and man power, and will span a generation to show significant progress. There are pockets of such programs in existence, primarily church run. Such programs need funding for support and expansion to cover all areas where poverty is generational. This funding should and can receive support from both parties. Helping the poor is at the core of American values.
I intended to make this the final in this series of blogs. Alas, more to talk about. One more blog coming the end of the week. Until then.
No comments:
Post a Comment