The (apparently former) mayor of Colorado City, TX, got into a little hot water over these remarks directed at his constituents who are without power and water in the middle of a blizzard.
Let's have a fireside chat about this.
Let's have a fireside chat about this.
Bad Political Cliché #1: It's all about individuals.
Contrary to the famous Margaret Thatcher line (though it is sometimes taken out of context), there is such a thing as society. What is happening in Texas right now is a failure of institutions, first and foremost...
Contrary to the famous Margaret Thatcher line (though it is sometimes taken out of context), there is such a thing as society. What is happening in Texas right now is a failure of institutions, first and foremost...
So it's more than a little tin-eared to talk about "laziness" being the problem when the power grid has failed due to lack of preparation and the streets are being ploughed due to lack of resources.
Yikes moment # 2: Asserting that social Darwinism has something to do with Christianity.
"The strong will survive and the weak will parish (sic.)," we are told.
That ain't a conservative sentiment, folks at least not in any sense we should respect.
"The strong will survive and the weak will parish (sic.)," we are told.
That ain't a conservative sentiment, folks at least not in any sense we should respect.
To his credit, the mayor is also willing to admit, in passing, that some people truly can't help themselves and need help from others.
Which is of course incoherent, but at least he's not a monster.
Which is of course incoherent, but at least he's not a monster.
Here's the thing: of course people should help themselves and their families, to the extent they can.
He doesn't mention this at all, but they should also help their neighbors and communities.
He doesn't mention this at all, but they should also help their neighbors and communities.
Not only that, but (Bad Political Cliché #3) they should help their neighbors, individually or collectively, without obsessively judging them for whether or not they have somehow morally merited help. They question is whether they need it.
The "deserving vs. undeserving poor" distinction is mostly a way to wash our hands of our other people's problems.
Personal responsibility matters.
Repeating mantras about personal responsibility does not help your neighbor with no heat or water.
Personal responsibility matters.
Repeating mantras about personal responsibility does not help your neighbor with no heat or water.
*not ploughed, of course
It's true that government can't do everything for people. They need other resources.
More than anything, they need people in their communities they can draw on.
More than anything, they need people in their communities they can draw on.
The "Cajun Navy" volunteers showed us how powerful people working for the good of their own neighbors can be.
But the "every man for himself" attitude isn't just anti-government. It's corrosive to that kind strength of community as well.
But the "every man for himself" attitude isn't just anti-government. It's corrosive to that kind strength of community as well.
Ironically, the attitude that I don't owe anything to my neighbor results in more big government. If there's nothing standing between me and the corporate marketplace (or a blizzard), then of course we need powerful institutions to prevent atomized individuals from being crushed.
...but simply cutting people loose to sink or swim (or freeze) isn't going to restore the thick social relationships that make a decent community life possible.
We need government, in its place, and individuals, in theirs. But we also need a whole lot more in between.
We need government, in its place, and individuals, in theirs. But we also need a whole lot more in between.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
