The human condition is at it’s heart a balancing act. We are essentially animals, and as such we have needs and drives that are powerful motivators of our behavior. Yet beyond these animal impulses there exists at our core a rational, spiritual and metaphysical component. Some might call it our conscience, perhaps a soul; it could be simply labelled humanity, as it is what makes us human. These two sides of our essence are not by any means constant. Getting back on your diet is always easier after a bowl of ice cream! One always pulls against the other, and the tug of war is rarely won by either side entirely in the course of our brief pilgrimage here. Ultimately it is best, and we fulfill our essential purpose, when the two are in equilibrium. Humanity housed in mortal flesh, both must be nourished.
Sometimes people work so hard they neglect proper rest and diet; and while working hard is a virtue, it is not the only virtue… and clearly there is more to life. More often it is the opposite that is true, people don’t like to work, and avoid it as much as possible. Oh, I know there are exceptions, “workaholics” we call them, but given the choice most would choose leisure over work… often to their own detriment. It’s popular for politicians to tell us how Americans would rather work than be unemployed, rather pay their own way than accept a hand-out, and that the safety net is always a last resort. I’m sure for some that is still true, but for many, the temptation to entitlements without labor is too good to resist. Entitlements structure without consideration of this simple fact turns the government into a behemoth enabler of slothfulness and pauperism, and threatens a fatal overload of the only safety net that some of our truly needy depend on.
Some suppose that a good work ethic is a natural part of our human psyche, and as such will always be a driver of most people’s behavior. History would seem to indicate otherwise. To the Hebrews, the Greeks, and the Romans, work was seen as gauche, something that marked you as low class. Even within the early Church, labor was seen as something to be avoided in favor of prayer and contemplation. It wasn’t until the Protestant Reformation that the development of an individual work ethic came to be considered as a virtue. Of course this begs the question, how did these societies prosper if no one wanted to work? The answer is slavery. Slaves of one form or another made it possible for the fortunate ones to avoid working themselves, and actually be proud of it. A life of hard work was considered a curse, and so a life of leisure was deemed a sign of God’s blessing and favor.
More recently, we have tended to esteem the working man or woman a bit higher. Even when one achieves a success that would enable them to cease with their labor, we as a culture admire them more when they continue to go to the office every day and share the lot of the rest of us. Though we might secretly covet their situation, we are not enamored of those who lounge on their yachts while others toil. By the same token, while hard workers generally enjoy sharing the fruit of their labor with those less fortunate (the rewards of charity are one of the perks of productive labor), it is particularly galling to them to see their blood, sweat and tears parceled out to the idle, who have given in to their baser desires, by a government that permits and even promotes it. In an ironic twist of the ancient mentality we have returned to a concept that hard work is for suckers, this time the view is shared by some in all classes; from the tycoon on his yacht sipping expensive scotch while “his people” toil to maintain his comfort; to the middle class family drinking Buds at their cookout and taking food stamps instead of a second job, or some overtime at the plant, or foregoing a few toys; to the lower income young adults of every race smoking weed on the stoop first thing in the morning at 11:30. Who makes this new found anti-work ethic possible? Who’s doing the work to keep the country funtioning? Same as ever, the slaves.
Don’t misunderstand me; historically, slavery in our country and around the world has been an horrific indignity and injustice perpetrated upon its victims, and I don’t mean to diminish the gravity of that abomination in my comparison. The idea, though, of some people toiling for the purpose of others voluntarily remaining at leisure is at its core the dynamic of slavery… let’s call it “neo-slavery” to maintain a boundary. Ultimately, when you untie the labor from the reward of that labor you lose the incentive for productivity. Slavery is at best an inefficient method of accomplishing work. Slaves would often sing in rhythmic call and response spirituals to pace their work, to match each others pace and avoid punishment, but work at a considerably slower pace than they were able… what motivation did they have to do otherwise? If this reminds you of certain union shops you may have worked in, consider the same separation of wages from productivity or merit as the reason. The system, as it stands, to some extent punishes productivity and rewards idleness. To a point, this may be unavoidable, but it’s a problem that needs to be compensated for, and not dismissed as if it were a made up talking point for greedy conservatives… we need to find ways to reward work and productivity and avoid coming to the place where good hard-working people feel like “neo-slaves”, and begin to question why they bother trying.
There were also the house slaves. They were considered the more fortunate since they didn’t need to sweat in the fields, but they still belonged to the master, and their only other option was to join their brethren in the more difficult toil. Just because someone lives from entitlements doesn’t mean they are free men. In many ways, they are more the slaves. They are kept sated in the station of life they find themselves, and insufficiently encouraged to do the hard work needed to partake of the mobility of the American Dream. There are basic things required to succeed in any job, and while we do attend somewhat to training in skills and education (though our “success” here should be the subject of someone else’s blog!), we are woefully inadequate at teaching the values that lead to success, including showing up and working hard. Money has so long been tied to the concept of success, that we have forgotten the intrinsic value of a good work ethic. When did we come to pay greater honor to the dealer who sells drugs in the school yard than the janitor who mops the floors? Is the financial wizard who makes his millions on the backs of duped investors more a success than the factory worker teaching his children the value of hard work and integrity? Like Pavlov’s dogs, we salivate for the bell even when there is no real food.
There is no question that there are some unfortunate people unable to work, or unable to find work, we need to provide for these in their time of need if we are to remain a truly human society. But remember that work is like food, we need it to truly remain human. If a man can’t find work, he should make work… sweep the sidewalk, clean the basement… idle hands truly are the devil’s workshop. Are there middle class folks that accept a handout they could live without? Who take the unemployment instead of a less than perfect job, or just as an extended vacation? You know there are. Clearly there are those as well who were glad to have the safety net when they truly needed it, for whom the brief relief from charity is enough to keep them from losing everything… for these, remember that someone else worked for this… maybe even you in years past; be grateful but not unworthy of their labor, and work hard at finding work… don’t wait for it to find you just because someone else is paying the freight. I don’t doubt that some of the wealthy have come into their riches by honest means, but idleness is a poison and the words “If a man doesn’t work, he shouldn’t eat” were also written to those who can afford to eat without working.
IMHO: It is the nature of most men to not particularly enjoy a lifetime of hard work. Related to this, and to more complex motivations, is the propensity for some to desire to enslave others. Hand in hand with our desire to build our nation with freedom for all, came the understanding that for all to be free, all would need to work. If all shared the American work ethic, our cities would thrive, and our countryside would prosper. By discouraging that ethic, by insinuating that working hard is not a path to success, by allowing wealth to be gained unscrupulously, by untying the reward from merit and productivity, by permitting and promoting idleness; we water down the fuel from the engine of prosperity, and it runs poorly if at all. The rebellion of “Atlas Shrugged” is not so far fetched. It is not likely to occur as a mass exodus of the working men and women. Nevertheless, in America liberty is in our collective consciousness, and we don’t take well to slavery or neo-slavery. There are no fences on this plantation, and the master has no daunting whip. If we refuse to cooperate we will not die. What if working men and women refuse to be so used? What if all the slaves just walk or fade away? Who will do the work then? “Where shall we go? What shall we do?” …Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn.
Lost me on the last sentence, but this is a wonderfully imaginative and well-crafted piece that gives your readers much to think about. In the end, we are going to have to give a damn about one another and cease practices that corrupt human nature by appealing to those base instincts that you so thoughtfully point to. Most Americans once understood and agreed with the notion that “the road to Hell is paved with good intentions.” The “feel-good” ideology of the left has turned that understanding on its head and good intentions not results or outcomes have become the primary criteria driving their decisions to promote “social justice” (whatever that means).
@PVL: Great comment. So often I hear ideologues insisting that in large measure those “base instincts” do not exist. They are either naive, or disingenuous. Forgive me for my homage to “Gone With The Wind” at the end. “Giving a damn” about one another is indeed part of our humanity. The reference came as I contemplated an Ayn Rand type revolution where the “producers” finally reach the breaking point and cease their voluntary “slavery” whereby the fruits of their labor are taken, wasted, or used to the detriment of others. I envisioned more of a “winding down” than an actual revolution, where tax avoidance would come in the form of lower productivity, less risk-taking, and charity more personal and direct. As I considered the reaction of our Government masters as their engine of redistribution ground to a halt, the Scarlett O’Hara line came to mind…. I could not then leave Rhett Butler’s fitting response left unsaid!
I agree with your analysis of the human condition in the first paragraph of your blog post. Our humanity is indeed housed in mortal flesh and all the temptations that come with it. There is no use in denying either side of what ultimately makes us human beings. In any society there are individuals who will abuse existing welfare systems. Government agencies can try to minimize such abuse by tailoring benefits to those truly in need but such efforts are always a dangerous balancing act. If in doubt, providing adequately for the needy should always take precedence over preventing potential welfare abuse by a small minority. The political right likes to blow this issue way out of proportion since the underprivileged are an easy scapegoat for much deeper underlying problems rooted in ideologies and policies that they support. It is simply not true that one can live comfortably off of government “hand-outs” in the United States. If you know somebody who does, please tell me because I would like to know their secret. Maybe one can scrape by, for a while, and obviously, someone eligible for welfare has little incentive to work a minimum wage job with little to no benefits. The problem is not our barely existing social net, it is the fact that labor isn’t adequately valued. The “middle class family drinking Buds at their cookout and taking food stamps instead of a second job, or some overtime at the plant” is not the result of a system that is too generous with its benefits, it is the result of capitalist greed. No one should have to work a second job or overtime in order to get by and support their family to begin with. Workers should receive adequate compensation for their labor and generous benefits for their willingness to dedicate much of their lives to their employer. If we want to discourage people from unjustly taking advantage of the welfare system we must make work more attractive, not slash social benefits. You are making some valid observations but your analysis offers little but mainstream conservative demagogy. The real slave holders in America are the capitalist corporations whose mode of production thrives on the exploitation of labor. The working class has been conditioned to the extent that such exploitation is now seen as the norm. Indeed, what if all the slaves one day woke up and just walked away? In this sense, “Workers of the world, unite!”
@tsc444: Some great points. The subject is a big one, and multifaceted. The entry was already split in two and still too large, but I did try to give at least a passing nod to the idea of human greed and the desire to enslave. Capitalist greed, though sometimes blown out of proportion by the far left, has indeed been on the rise since at least the 1980’s when annual increases in profit projection goals became the norm in corporate financial planning. With this mentality the bottom line became God, and product quality, customer service and fair wages were the sacrificial lambs. We might differ on the solutions to that… we might not.
Obviously, living entirely off public assistance is not a wonderful existence, nor should it be, but as you suggest, sometimes there is not enough motivation to move people to work instead of taking the handouts; and worse, fixing that seems a small part of the conversation. True that real labor and a solid work ethic is not adequately valued, and ironically sometimes unions, while part of the solution, also become part of the problem. It is better, though, on all levels to take the low wage job and earn your living, meager as it may be… there are no promotions on welfare. Your observation that much of the problem lies in the lack of incentive to be productive is a good one, I would suggest that a good part of that is the tax burden. Some would question whether a system that allows for Bud drinking middle class people to receive food stamps can be termed anything but too generous in some regards. With the waiving of asset limits for people earning even temporarily below 185% of the federal poverty level you can live in a $300,000 home, have two new cars in the driveway, a million in your IRA, and still be eligible for food stamps! People used to save for a rainy day… why bother? I spoke to a young couple last night who earn $65,000/ yr. but will still be receiving nearly $8,000 for a first time home buyers down payment assistance program, because their application went through before his promotion was official. I was speaking with another family who just put a $30,000 addition on their home, have no mortgage, and are eligible for food stamps, heating assistance, and countless other programs… to their credit, they choose not to accept what they do not feel they need, but how many would turn down free money? These are not cases of abusing the system… this is the system. Clearly, erring on the side of providing adequately for the truly needy is to be preferred over cutting waste but weakening the safety net… I just wonder if we couldn’t cut back on the margin of that error!