The Dark Ages

Having received my umpteenth email about how the world is coming to an end because we passed a piss pore health care bill, I must finally respond.

Capitalism is an economic structure.

Democracy is a government structure.

Caring for our fellow man is a social concept which has become quite the dilemma. Though traditionally, social responsibility has been recognized as a sign of more developed societies, we have recently been viewing it as a very bad thing in deed. Note in deed, as in action, as in the doing of a thing. It seems we all agree that caring for our fellow man is a good thing to do, a good idea, it simply isn't productive, somehow, anymore, maybe.

We, as a society, have deemed that we choose to care for our fellow man. We have shown this in many ways over the centuries; through our US Constitution, the Hippocratic Oath, acts of kindness, respect for laws, teaching our children about faith, love and honor, and reverence for icons such as Jesus and Gandhi. These are all in deed, ways in which we show our respect for our social construct.  They all fall under the heading of government, the passive, please just fix it factor or, religious, don't you dare challenge my beliefs because I won't factor.  The fact that we no longer encourage our youth through teaching, or by example, to ponder or evaluate our ideologies, individually or as a whole, is not only painfully apparent, but bizarre and the real enemy at hand.  Ignorance is always the enemy.  To not know a thing is to be ignorant of it - be clear - that is all I mean.  I am ignorant of much including brain surgery, which is why I don't attempt it.

... but I digress.  So, the job of executing displays and results of our moral compass cannot fall on the private sector as it is not a job based on financial gain or latitude. It is a moral stance that has nothing to do with economics or self pursuits (as in gain, as capitalistic.)  It has to do with our maturation as a culture, as a society, as self.   Do we choose to aid each other in living or do we step over the dying to attain what we, personally, want?  Do these two pursuits clash?  If I felt they didn't, what does that look like?  Do I really care?  As we have long ago formed a general unified position and not since, looked back, or forward, it seems there are now some varied opinions on 'our' opinion and no one left skilled to discuss it.

As we have put our moral stance in the hands of our government to execute for us so as not to interrupt our desire to self succeed, we must then A) support its efforts to represent our moral majority or B) openly admit we really don't give a fuck about our neighbor and dismantle our government.  To continue to defend that this argument is over the fear for our financial health and not a question of our moral compass is a farce.

The most recent rant I received on this matter contained the following stats as an argument for the terrible state our country is in:

VERY INTERESTING! the percentage of each past president's cabinet who had worked in the private business sector prior to their appointment to the cabinet. You know what the private business sector is... a real life business, not a government job. Here are the percentages.


T. Roosevelt........ 38%

Taft..................... 40%

Wilson ................. 52%

Harding.................49%

Coolidge.............. 48%

Hoover................. 42%

F. Roosevelt......... 50%

Truman................. 50%

Eisenhower........... 57%

Kennedy.............. 30%

Johnson................ 47%

Nixon.................... 53%

Ford..................... 42%

Carter................... 32%

Reagan................. 56%

GH Bush.............. 51%

Clinton ................. 39%

GW Bush............. 55%

And the winner of the Chicken Dinner is.....Obama......8% !

I find this the lamest of arguments. Had more of our leaders remained in the non-for-profit arena perhaps we would have a more morally grounded group of leaders. Had we responsibly maintained clearer definition of duty as a government employee, would we really be questioning our government's intentions or responsibilities in regards to health care for all?  Or would we be questioning there financial bail out of PRIVATE enterprises that lied and stole?

I'm all for opinions and debate but mixing metaphors and platforms under the beguilement of greed, which is actually fear of loosing what you have such a tenuous hold on - a wealthy sustainable life - is not only ignorant and misguided, it is morally repugnant.

The "Dark Ages" were termed such for that reason. Scarcity and the fear thus overtook common decency and we, humanity, stepped over our dying and ignorant and blamed them our lot. We never once took responsibility for our state as a whole recognizing that in denying our love and respect for life, all life, is to deny ourselves the right to feel good when we wake up each morning. It's that simple.   Do you like who you are today? You are not only you, you are a part of the collective you. The you that votes or doesn't, is polite or isn't, is keen to your environment (home, car, neighborhood, school district, state, world) or isn't.

This entire ridiculous argument that we will now plummet into financial despair if we morally take a positive stance is absurd! The fact that our government is near financial ruin is due to the fact that we've demanded it serve our capitalistically driven economy. That's not its job! Shut up! Quit whining! You will not now live a less fruitful life because your neighbor might not dye of a staff infection. You will live a more fruitful life because your neighbor is better cared for with little personal assistance from you. WE have raised our moral bar... by a freakin' smidgen of a hair on a gnats ass.

More on how this bill is also a complete farce but FINALLY a conversational piece to behold later.

I do think Obama deserves an accolade for his willingness to be fed as the sacrificial lamb for the sake of our humanity.

Sincerely,
Kat Nesbit