From the minds and keyboards of our vast readership out there in Annapolis cyberspace. My only complaint is that these letters come anonymously. What is this--Stalinist Russia?:
I know this may be difficult to believe, but there are also mean spirited people spouting off, ranting, raving, name calling and spewing vicious vitriol that have what other fair-minded people would call ultra-liberal liberal viewpoints, although many of these ultra-liberals prefer to be called "fair minded progressives" (whom often seem to be dedicated to progressively raising taxes). They talk a lot about tolerance & diversity, but have no tolerance for a diverse opinion.
Dear Anonymous:
No, it's not difficult to believe and I have gotten @#%# from some lefties as well for things I write. I remember one guy who literally screamed at me from his keyboard because I dared to criticize our local police union shop! When you see lefties and ultra-liberals engaging in such nasty name calling and character assassination, please bring it to my attention. I don;t deny that people of all political stripes behave this way, but I do believe it tends to be more prevalent and pronounced within conservative ranks, and that it seems to be more a part of their modus operandi than it is among lefties. CP has little patience for bogus bull#@** regardless of the political bent.
And another letter:
Paul,
In reference to your reply to Frederick's post...why do you contend that America is not the land of unbridled opportunity? Frankly, I find the bull-headed, blustering conservatives to be equally annoying as the socially-superior, smarmy liberals, so I would never defend their droning "Why-Do-You-Hate-America" rhetoric. However, all evidence that I have seen, anecdotal and statistical, would indicate that the standard of living in the United States, among all classes, exceeds that of most industrialized nations. In fact, without minimizing the issues of institutional poverty and racism in this country, the "very poor" to whom you refer in Annapolis live lives that are light years ahead of poor people living in refugee camps in Sub-Saharan Africa, among other places. Again, that's not to say that public housing is even close to ideal, or effective, but let's not call everyone who lives there "victims." That seems slightly paternalistic. Talk to virtually any immigrant who came here with a couple of dollars in their pocket, from all over the globe, and I am willing to bet you my second-born son (who is presently my least-favorite) that they can list the opportunities that are available in this country that the rest of us regard as a birthright. For example, according to the Pew Hispanic Center, Latino business ownership is currently growing at THREE TIMES the national average, and the Hispanic purchasing power is expected to reach more than $1 trillion by 2011. That's trillion with a "t." AND the vast majority of these business owners are immigrants to this country. This makes us native-borns look like slackers. Why? Again, because we take opportunity for granted. Check out Forest Drive. How many latino businesses do you see springing up? Muchos. Are you telling me that someone who clawed their way through the blazing deserts of the southwest and rode thousands of miles in the back of a stifling boxtruck with twenty bucks in their pocket has better opportunities than someone who lives in Robinwood?
Tim
Dear Tim:
You write that "all evidence that I have seen, anecdotal and statistical, would indicate that the standard of living in the United States, among all classes, exceeds that of most industrialized nations." I would take exception to that and I don't think that the statistics would uphold your view, but it is interesting you admit we have "classes" in America. We seem to have lost whatever top living standard positions we may have once held, and a stroll (though I would suggest a quick drive-by) through much of nearby Baltimore, Anacostia and as mentioned, Newtown and Robinwood, would tell a different--very different story.
If we looked at health care and health statistics alone, I'd wager that we are nowhere near the top when compared with other developed or industrialized nations. How many millions do we have without even basic health insurance or access to basic care?
I am relieved that you admit there is institutionalized poverty and racism in this country. An awful lot of people can't bring themselves around to "get" that. However, regarding public housing, you write, "let's not call everyone who lives there 'victims.' That seems slightly paternalistic." First if all, did I ever say such a thing? Please show me. Second of all, many people in public housing are victims, although in many cases, it is a self-inflicted kind of victimization. I have repeatedly deplored the multi-generational cycle of despair. Eventually, each individual must take a stand, make a choice, and work toward rising above poverty and weakness, or falling further into it. How we as a society choose to make one choice easier or harder for the "victim" is the issue.
You write, "Are you telling me that someone who clawed their way through the blazing deserts of the southwest and rode thousands of miles in the back of a stifling boxtruck with twenty bucks in their pocket has better opportunities than someone who lives in Robinwood?" That's a tall order indeed! No, I am not willing to say one group has better opportunities than another. The issue you raise has been one with which I have wrestled for a long time. My grandparents came here as poor immigrants, but we must not lose sight of the fact that immigrants chose to come and were generally welcomed as such, to the land of opportunity, although they soon learned the streets were not paved with gold. Wealthy capitalist owners exploited them too and living wages and fair working conditions did not come about because the robber barons making huge fortunes decided to share.
Our country's history is replete with example of the wealthy finding ways to pit one lower class group against another. The wealthy and powerful have engaged in class warfare since the dawn of history, yet the instant that someone speaks out against the rich, they get accused of fomenting class warfare.
For the most part, the ancestors of those living in despair in local public housing came from a legacy of slavery. They were rounded up, brought here against their will and enslaved and oppressed for generations, for centuries. We don't undo that legacy in a few years, or even a few generations, but we have come far enough that it is reasonable to ask why those still in this seemingly endless despair of poverty and weakness cannot climb out of it.
I don't have the answer. I am tired of the culture of victimization we have developed. The people that continue to exist in our troubled and violence prone public housing are the ones that will ultimately have to decide their fate and act to better their lives. Do they wish to remain weak and economically distressed for generations to come? However, having said that, I do think our greater community has to have this conversation about poverty and wealth and come to understand that this disparity hurts the rich and the poor in a host of ways.
Unfortunately there are few if any local leaders of any background or of any political bent that are willing to openly and honestly struggle with this challenge. Why is that?
Bay Daily on Hiatus
-
Congratulations to Bay Daily creator, Tom Pelton, who has accepted a
position with another organization working to make the world a better
place. In his ab...
10 years ago
4 Comments:
I am relieved that you admit there is institutionalized poverty and racism in this country. An awful lot of people can't bring themselves around to "get" that. However, regarding public housing, you write, "let's not call everyone who lives there 'victims.' That seems slightly paternalistic." First if all, did I ever say such a thing? Please show me. Second of all, many people in public housing are victims...
So Paul, here's the thing, you indignantly deny that you called people who live in the projects "victims," in in the very next sentence, you call them victims. What's more, here is your quote from May 2:
2. You seem to believe that the "rich" deserve to be "rich" while the poor deserve to be "poor." I think that's way too complex an argument to boil down to that sentence, but you seem to be engaging in a "blame the victim" type of attitude. It is true for some, not true for others.
You are calling poor people victims. I don't get the ambiguity.
Tim
Good grief! How many angels can fit on the head of a pin? Can't I be ironic? Until that post, I again contend that I never wrote that "the poor" are victims, and you can't find where I said that (you know that's true)...until my next sentence as you did point out. Hah! What you so conveniently failed to read or emphasize was what followed, so here goes again. I wrote "Second of all, many people in public housing are victims, although in many cases, it is a self-inflicted kind of victimization. I have repeatedly deplored the multi-generational cycle of despair. Eventually, each individual must take a stand, make a choice, and work toward rising above poverty and weakness, or falling further into it. How we as a society choose to make one choice easier or harder for the 'victim' is the issue."
Please read, or re-read my next-to-last paragraph because you seem to want to pigeonhole me. I don't get pigeon-holed so easily.
As for your second point, may I again suggest you review what I wrote in the post and what was repeated above in this comment.
Now--on to pigeonhole you Tim. Do you wish to engage in some kind of philosophical banter with me about whether abject poverty and ignorance in the midst of fabulous wealth is acceptable in this extremely rich society or do you wish to engage in a serious discussion about what to do about the gaping sore of public housing in our society? Again, read what I said which was, "How we as a society choose to make one choice easier or harder for the 'victim' is the issue." See? I put "victim" in quotes! (By the way, I have not "indignantly denied" anything....I think I've been pretty dignant about it--if that's even in the lexicon, but I kind of like it.....and I'm the publisher. Thanks again, and keep reading and writing, but please, let's not get pedantic. We're trying to solve a problem, not argue.
I thought we were trying to argue. That's the point of most of these blogs. You seem fairly liberal, and there are a ton of conservative bloggers out there. And as someone who is in the middle, I can attest that folks who identify themselves as left or right are not particularly open to changing their positions. Very rarely do I see political bloggers use the sentence, "Gee, I admire and respect your position on this issue, and have now begun to rethink my own conclusions. Thanks for your thoughtful input." Let's be honest, we're not here to solve any problems. We're here to bitch and pontificate. Because I hardly think that our local elected officials are sifting through these blogs looking to crib ideas. With all due respect.
Tim
This is starting to sound like Monty Python's "Argument Clinic" routine. I am not here to argue and while it may be the point of many blogs, that is not what CP is about...except on rare occasion. Just read the hundreds of posts over the last 16 months and see.
As far as being honest, I am here to solve problems and not to bitch or pontificate. It may sometimes go with the territory, but if that's all you have in mind, I'm not buying.
Feel free to join us Thursdays from 8 to 9 am at Ahh Coffee or make a time and place to meet me for a beer or a cup of coffee, but I'm here to solve problems, not argue. As for our local elected officials, some of them read CP and some do not. Some of them argue, some of them try to solve problems.
Post a Comment