The Conscience of a Social Democrat
This passage, from an address by Tony Judt lamenting the narrow political horizons of Americans, seems like it belongs in one of those “agree/disagree” online tests that try to tell you which political philosophy you should subscribe to, or how far left or right you are:
In the contemporary United States, at a time of growing unemployment, a jobless man or woman is not a full member of the community. In order to receive even the exiguous welfare payments available, they must first have sought and, where applicable, accepted employment at whatever wage is on offer, however low the pay and distasteful the work. Only then are they entitled to the consideration and assistance of their fellow citizens.
Why do so few of us condemn such “reforms”—enacted under a Democratic president? Why are we so unmoved by the stigma attaching to their victims? Far from questioning this reversion to the practices of early industrial capitalism, we have adapted all too well and in consensual silence …
I read this and thought: Not a full member of the community? Because of work requirements? What an extraordinarily pernicious notion — that it’s somehow degrading, or a form of second-class citizenship, to be expected to look for a new job while you’re accepting money from the public purse.
But of course exactly this moral-political theory is taken for granted by Judt, by most of his NYU audience, presumably, and by many highly intelligent people across the European and American left...
douthat.blogs.nytimes.com
and from the comments -
"How does commenter #2's emotional response, however informed it is by bitter experience, qualify as reasoned argument? Take out all the adjectives and you're left with "being unemployed sucks". Well, yeah, but how does that entitle anyone to my money? And how does that boil down to losing the basic responsibility to look for a job for as long as you're on the public purse? My God, is collecting charity actually seen as superior to searching for a lousy job? However little dignity one imagines in the latter, there's a self-sufficiency or at least attempt at self-sufficiency that puts it over in the mind of most Americans.
Is it not selfish to write an Elegy for Unconditional Unemployment as though collecting without trying to rectify the situation as soon as possible is a decent thing to do? Why do I owe you anything? Let us say that I like a social safety net. After all, it could be me or a family member collecting unemployment someday. But it doesn't follow from there that I'd be okay with that family member collecting eternally without searching for a job. As for me, I'd sooner flip burgers than make the jump from temporary beneficiary of a liberal society to entitled parasite. So how this no-strings-attached welfare became a moral imperative, I don't quite get."
Alex Schindler
New York
December 14th, 2009
11:18 am
douthat.blogs.nytimes.com |
