|
Edited on Thu Apr-09-09 06:23 PM by Mike 03
I get tired of hearing lectures from people--almost always wealthy republicans or more likely these pathetic middle-class Americans who are republicans but don't know why, who are identifying with the oppressor--lecture about what indigent or impoverished people should do with the donations we give them, or worse, why they do not merit our assistance. Would you not like to examine the medicine and liquor cabinets of the lecturers?
Interestingly, this debate--and these tiresome lectures--has raged since at least Samuel Johnson's day, England, 1720. It was said that it's futile to give money to beggars or poor people because most of the time they just spend that money on tobacco, alcohol, entertainment, junk food, etc...
It's elucidating and informative to know that this argument has been persisting on for hundreds of years, and that the arguments on both sides have remained basically the same.
(For some sources, check out Jeff Meyers new--spectacular--biography of Samuel Johnson and its description of England circa 1737. Also, enjoy the debates pertaining to capital punishment. Nothing has changed!)
This is my feeling, after thinking about the arguments made by people like Samuel Johnson all the way up to Jonathan Kozol and his brilliant, investigative, compassionate exploration of the lives of people living in poverty.
In general, I don't care what they do with the money they receive.
The only caveat is that I've known of situations where parents splurged on their vices before providing for their young children. Other than that, I don't feel I have any say in the matter.
When I give, I let go of that money and I let go of the right to suggest how it is used.
As someone who used to enjoy nicotine, and still enjoys escapes of other kinds, I have no right to tell them to deprive themselves of their escapes.
What if their escape is running, and they buy running shoes? Is that an extreme, obscene extravagance because they "should be" buying lettuce and healthy organic vegetables? Or is that a wise investment in future health? Or I've know people who binge on food, and that was their way of coping with anxiety.
I just think it's pious, hypocritical and pretentious, unless we are perfect individuals, to give money with strings attached to those in need. After reading so many of Kozol's works, I will never again begrudge the rights of a woman on welfare to smoke, or use the money she receives however she deems will make her existence tolerable.
|