NewMediaJournal.us
www.NewMediaJournal.us
Return
to Article
Kindle Compatible
Nancy Salvato, Senior Editor
Impoverishment, Elitism & Apathy
March 9, 2009
We
experience considerable disjoint between those with money to run
expensive campaigns for the Senate or House of Representatives and those
persuaded to elect the chosen few. This great disparity is without a
doubt a function of the degree to which impoverishment or elitism
defines the classes that make up our society. While many people let the
world of politics revolve without giving it a second thought, our
present political reality begs for our attention and consideration. We
cannot afford to disengage.
R.K. Payne, in
A Framework for Understanding Poverty, defines poverty as, “the
extent to which an individual does without resources.” It’s most
interesting to learn about the types of resources to which a person may
be deprived: financial; emotional (being able to choose and control
emotional responses without being self destructive); mental (given
ability and acquired skills); spiritual; physical; support systems;
relationships/role models; and knowledge of hidden rules within the
classes. Poverty can be generational or circumstantial.
Each class of people follows a hidden set of rules around possessions,
money, time, education, destiny, etc... Payne explains that those
experiencing poverty tend to live in the present and their decisions are
based on feelings or survival. They believe in fate and that they cannot
do much to mitigate chance. Decisions made by the middle class are
driven by how they will affect their future. They believe in choice and
that good choices can change their future. The wealthy, in part, base
their decision making on tradition and decorum. They see their destiny
as tied to their birthright. To respond to the challenges our schools
face, we need to define and prescribe precise solutions to the variety
of poverty identified in our schools and surrounding communities so that
each challenge can be addressed appropriately. A doctor would not
amputate the leg of a person having a heart attack or prescribe
medication that wasn’t meant for a particular condition.
Of course, if I was a conspiracy theorist, I might speculate that there
is deliberateness to throwing money at problems without a plan based on
the unique circumstances of any given situation. An impoverished
citizenry cannot understand what is best for them. They need others to
take care of them. An elite class might feel most suited, indeed,
entitled or charged with taking care of the unwashed masses, those
unable to help themselves. Though the slaves relied on their masters,
they didn’t care for the circumstances of their existence. However, the
best way to control a people is to keep them uneducated and without the
means to take care of themselves or the ability to mobilize and to fight
for a better existence.
Impoverishment will not be solved by the indiscriminate spending of
money. Despite what we know to be true, wealthy members of Congress (In
1992, there were
28 millionaires in the U.S. Senate, 21 of whom were Democrats.
In 2008, most U.S. senators and representatives
earned $169,300.) would like to think that legislating tax payer
money to redistribute our wealth to those “in need” will solve our
societal ills. There is more at play here, people. Pumping money into a
failing company will not change the fundamental reasons for its lack of
success. The reason for the failure must be addressed. If a person is
not performing well on the job, more training might be in order or it
might be decided that there is simply a poor fit. Raising a person’s
salary is not going to change the circumstances that led to poor
performance. It only rewards poor performance. It is said that one
definition of insanity is someone who does the same thing over and over
expecting a different outcome each time. It’s funny how those who
believe in redistributing wealth expect a different outcome even though
we’ve seen over and over the kind of disasters it portends. To give you
an idea, just watch The Killing Fields.
It is imperative we elect representatives who understand their civic
duty to uphold the tenets of our US Constitution and to defeat those who
believe in the tenets of socialism (redistribution of wealth) or
communism (a government run not for and by the people but by elitists
who believe they know more and are in the best position to make our
choices on our behalf). The word socialism is being bandied about with
more frequency in the mainstream media, as of late. There is much
confusion between the ideologies of
socialism and communism. “Both socialism and communism seek to
manage the economy through deliberate and collective social control.”
They both want to see the goods and services produced in an
economy publicly owned and controlled and planned by a centralized
organization. There are some important differences. “In socialism,
distribution should take place according to the amount of individuals'
production efforts, while communism asserts that that goods and services
should be distributed among the populace according to individuals'
needs.” There is one distinction which needs to be given a great deal
more of our attention. “Communists assert that both capitalism and
private ownership of means of production must be done away with as soon
as possible in order to make sure a classless society, the
communist ideal, is formed.” Socialists believe that socialism can exist
in a capitalist society as long as the capitalism is controlled somehow
by a centralized planning system. “Where socialism generally aims to
have as many people as possible influence how the economy works,
communism seeks to concentrate that number into a smaller amount.”
Whether our representatives or those behind their campaigns are
deliberately moving our country in the direction of socialism or
communism is not yet certain. That the goods and services produced by
our people are being redistributed is without question. What they seem
to be creating is a hybrid of sorts. It’s is sometimes referred to as
neo-Marxism. The Elitists are striving to run a capitalist system using
socialist dogma. While this is happening before our eyes, we can see the
disaster of such a system created in Europe, which is moving away from
this hybrid as evidenced by a move to the right on the European
continent.
One reason for the disconnect between those with the financial means to
campaign for and hold public office in Congress and those whom they
represent is that those with extreme wealth see the world as their
oyster. While many of us spend the majority of our time within 30 miles
of our homes, the rich can afford homes all around the country or
throughout the world. They have the money to travel anywhere and
everywhere. This gives them an “international perspective” (translate:
Globalism). This diverges from the middle class, who see the world from
a nationalist point of view (translate: Constitutional Republic), or
those who grow up without the means to see anything beyond their local
environment (translate: I don’t see how I benefit from either).
Those born into wealth manage portfolios. They don’t necessarily see the
connection between the labor that allows for such wealth and their own
material comforts. Those who live their lives outside of this privileged
existence succeed or fail, depending on the type of poverty they are
dealt and their ability to overcome their challenges. Most people
appreciate assistance in helping them to help themselves, but none
should ever be made to feel entitled to a particular existence. Today,
as some in the wealthy class watch Congress spend taxpayer money
indiscriminately and without concern for how it affects the stock
market, they are becoming reeducated in the inherent value of a free
market and government by and for the people. This provides an imperative
to coin a new phrase, corporate liberty: capitalism unencumbered by the
socialism inflicted on it by an elitist class. The elitist class, too,
could fall outside the realm of privilege...and some find themselves
facing a slippery slope.
It was with the understanding that an elitist group of people should not
be making decisions on behalf of people whose views were not
represented, that the Founders and Framers took on the daunting task of
creating what can best be described as the cradle of liberty. While many
of them held tremendous wealth themselves, they resented the idea that a
government could take the fruits of their industry for its own use.
Serving in Congress was an act of civic responsibility, unlike now,
where its members (lacking in the intellectual surplus necessary to face
today’s unique challenges) see their election to office as a license to
destroy the basic premise of our government –a government by and for
We the People.
It is time to start paying attention to what is happening to our
country. A culmination and confluence of events brought us to the
American Revolution and to the Civil War. We the People are
beginning to wake from a stupor and to recognize that the abuse of power
evidenced by the 111th Congress is staggering. There is a little
understood reason for the right to keep and bear arms. We need to be
reminded that the 2nd Amendment is to protect ourselves against the
tyranny of those who misuse their governmental office.
About Nancy Salvato
Nancy Salvato is the President and Director of Education and the
Constitutional Literacy Program for
BasicsProject.org, a
non-profit, non-partisan 501(c)(3) research and educational
project whose mission is to re-introduce the American public to
the basic elements of our constitutional heritage while
providing non-partisan, fact-based information on relevant
socio-political issues important to our country, specifically
the threats of aggressive Islamofascism and the American Fifth
Column. She serves as a Senior Editor for The New Media Journal.
She received her BA in history from Loyola University and her
M.Ed. in Early Childhood Education from National-Louis
University. She is certified to teach in grades K-9 and 6-12
and as a teacher has worked with students in preschool, 1st,
5th, 6th, 7th, 8th,
9th, 11th, and 12th grades. She
has also worked as an adjunct instructor at the graduate school
level. She continues to augment her education and areas of
expertise by taking college courses and participating in a
variety of workshops.
|
|
