K-I-S-S—Keep it Simple, Stupid!

Monday, March 9, 2009

When life, relationships, finances, world events, and social issues become bewilderingly complex, American seek simple answers and even simpler explanations. In April of 2008, trying to explain the culture of Working Class Americans to a group of much wealthier Californians, then-candidate Obama said:

"You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them," Obama said. "And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

We will recall that he was soundly criticized for being elitist and out-of-touch, even effete, for making a comment like that. His California audience understood his complex explanation. Those about whom he was explaining, however, did not. Fox News and right-wing radio, pretended not to understand him so they could be righteously indignant for the disrespected "true Americans" Obama so callously insulted.

Candidate Obama was correct. Small-town America does like it simple. They do cling to guns and god and the blaming of those they see as less powerful than themselves to vent frustrations. They did it then; they are doing it now.

I received the following, copy-and-past-and-send-to-everyone-on-your-email-list, message last week.

What a profound short little paragraph that says it all:

"You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it."
Dr. Adrian Rogers, 1931-2005

It certainly does not get any simpler than that—or any more ridiculously illogical.Let's look at it point-by-point.

"You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom."

What initially sounded reasonable is confused nonsense. First is the confusing and undefined use of the word "freedom." How is there a different law that provides freedom based upon socio-economic class? He could be referring to Jim Crow, or Poll Taxes, or institutionalized segregation. But how could that take freedom from wealthy people? It is Orwellian. It's like saying that the Emancipation Proclamation made free white men into slaves by declaring black saves free men. At its best, that statement is foolish, at its worst, it is bigotry. Either way—it's class warfare. What I mean is, it would be class warfare, only that term is reserved for instances where the lower classes cry foul against the upper classes—not the other way around. When the wealthy cry foul against the lower and middle classes, that is just capitalism.
Anyway, who the heck is taking away freedom? That was the PARTIOT act.

"What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving."

I thought this was a central aspect of Christian teaching. The Gospel of Matthew, Chapter 7, is where Jesus instructs:

"Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened. Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone? Or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent? If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him? Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets. "

Did noteth they covereth this in preacher school? Or was Dr. Rogers sick that day?

"The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. "

True, that is what governments do. That is how we get the funding necessary to build hospitals and libraries, to hire police and provide for the defense, to support education, to provide clean water . . . the list goes on. Am I missing the point?

Then Dr. Rogers says something really ridiculous:

"When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for."

Seriously? Fifty percent? Fully half of the population of the United States is operating under the assumption that they do not have to work because they will be provided for? And the other 50% is on the brink of joining in? Not one man or woman in this great country is intrinsically motivated? No one finds dignity in work? All of us are one lame excuse away from sloth?

"That, my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. "

I am really not trying to be cute here, but what does that mean? It's one of those lines meant to enrage and frighten rather than be coherent.

You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it."

Adrian Rogers was single-handedly responsible for Southern Baptists' hard turn right in the 1970. And for a man-o-the-cloth, he seems incongruently preoccupied with the accumulation of wealth. "Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God" (Matthew 19:24). Another sick day?

Eighty percent of the wealth on this planet is in the hands of about 220 people. That seems like more of a cause for a Southern Baptist preacher to champion than complaining about the wealthy not being wealthy enough.We all know that the motivation for the copying-pasting-and-forwarding of this and other emails like it is in reaction to President Obama's tax proposals.

The ironic thing is, I bet that no one on the mailing list makes over $250K a year. No one who receives, and reads, and forwards this absurd nonsense is going to be negatively affected by Obama's tax plan.

Why are people unaffected by this so willing to shill for the wealthy at the expense of the poor? I guess that is easier than taking the time to think about it. It's even easier to copy-paste-and forward.