How the Deterioration of Community Has Affected America’s Views on the Stimulus Plan

The problem is that the people that one feels obligated to help out becomes smaller and smaller as one becomes wealthier and wealthier.  They reach a point where there is never a need to interact with their community.  They have servants, the best entertainment systems, the most up-to-date game systems, all the newest games, the largest rooms, etc.  Their world now exists within this little bubble that they have created, and they get to pick and choose who is able to enter.

So there you are, stuck at the traffic light and not a single car in sight.  The internal debate begins on whether or not to “make a run for it” as you slowly let off the brakes to test the waters.  Usually, if you’re like me, by the time the light turns green you have succeeded in moving about 20 inches closer thanks to all of the one inch “stop and go” maneuvering.

A few months ago, I found myself in this all too familiar position.  Yet, right before I was put in the uncompromising position of having half my car beyond the designated stopping point, I noticed a parked Volkswagen plastered with bumper stickers.  Most of them were familiar,”I support the troops, but not the war,” “I am rooting for the trees,” and so on.  But there was one that really stuck with me, and has, thus, prompted me to dedicate a blog post to its importance. The bumper sticker read, “A Gated Community…An Oxymoron?”

Five simple words. And in light of recent debate surrounding Obama’s stimulus bill, these five words help shed light regarding the highly contested and passionate debate on what role the wealthiest Americans should have concerning our nation’s poor.

Before I begin, I need to put this in a broader context and provide a few caveats.  First, I’m using the stimulus bill to make my point because it is both recent and resonates with most Americans.  Yet, it is important to note that I don’t plan on disecting the minutiae of the bill. Instead, the bill represents the notion that wealthy Americans should help fund certain capabilities to our country’s poor.  As noticed by how Congress voted towards the bill, (with particular exception made to the three Republican Senators who abandoned their party and voted in favor of the bill), it is obvious that our country is divided on this, and I believe the bumper sticker’s emphasis on community can help us discern the main reasons for this divide.

_________________

Growing up in East Tennessee, I remember when I began my own faith journey.  Like most of us, the Church was heavily involved, but so were my friends – many of whom were beginning their own journey as well.  It was not long before I felt that I could speak on behalf of Christianity with a sense of authority, and remember how easy it was for me to determine from one’s beliefs and lifestyle whether they would be granted entrance into Heaven or condemned to punishment in Hell. My beliefs remained intact because they were never challenged…until I went to study in London.  In London, I became friends with folks from all different religious backgrounds (some who were much more pious than myself) and I began to make exceptions to my beliefs – and began to restrain from casting judgment based on one’s beliefs and lifestyle.  Teetering with abandoning the label “Christian” for the much more politically correct label of “spiritual” (see my other blog), I slowly developed a philosophy that I was not in a position to place value judgments on other people’s lives or choices, especially given the inadequacies of my own.

I mention this because my beliefs were challenged once I met and interacted with those that previously were viewed as the enigmatic “other.”  I had no connection to their lifestyle, and certainly did not have any obligation to their well-being.  Condemning them to an eternity of hell certainly didn’t affect me….until they became my friends, or put in other words, until they entered my “community.”  I believe a similar comparison can be made in regards to those wealthy Americans and others that do not believe they have an obligation to help America’s poor.  Of course, this is not all wealthy Americans (a point that liberals and democrats alike sometimes lose sight of).

But think about it…. most of our social groups revolve around where we fall in the income bracket.  Rarely will you see the wealthiest individuals in a community spending their nights with the poorest, and vice versa.  This is largely because money determines our status in society.  The more money one makes, the more successful they are believed to be.  The less one makes, or put more bluntly those that are on social welfare programs, the less successful one is.  There, of course, are more extreme cases where those on social welfare programs are seen as lazy, incompetent, etc.  These labels, in my opinion, are largely determined based on one’s income.

The result, then, is that society has created a disconnect between the wealthy and the poor, leading to skewed beliefs (such as the poor being more lazy than the wealthy) about one to the other.  This begins to explain why some wealthy Americans are reluctant to simply hand over their money to those that they do not know.  After all, they worked hard, put in the hours, invested properly, etc. Why should they give money to those that don’t work? Or didn’t get an education despite the plethora of scholarships out there for low income and minority citizens?  All of these are good questions, and certainly ones that you have heard before, but they are embedded in a preconceived notion that: 1) Only those that don’t work are poor – overlooking the millions of Americans that work but still do not have enough to pay rent, buy groceries, buy clothes, and other necessities – and 2) that every individual is aware of the scholarships and opportunities provided to them – and thus, make a conscious choice to remain poor.  These two flawed notions represent the overall disconnect between the wealthy and poor classes in America.

This is not to say, however, that the wealthy Americans should know better.  Instead, this just points out that a disconnect exists.  Wealthy Americans, in large part, are victims to their own insular lifestyle, unable to see the harsh realities that take place in most poor communities across America.  This is seen, for instance, in the fact that most wealthy Americans are not stingy with their money.  Most spend it rather loosely on cars, TV’s, homes, etc. and most even feel obligated to financially help out family and close friends.  The problem, though, is that the people that one feels obligated to help out becomes smaller and smaller as one becomes wealthier and wealthier.  They reach a point where there is never a need to interact with their community.  They have servants, the best entertainment systems, the most up-to-date game systems, all the newest games, the largest rooms, etc.  Their world now exists within this little bubble that they have created, and they get to pick and choose who is able to enter.

Poor communities, especially those in apartment complexes and housing projects, are not afforded that luxury.  They interact with multiple people on a daily basis – from church, to school, to neighborhood barbecues.  Thus, their group of friends that they feel obligated to help continues to grow.  Not only do they feel obligated to help out their family and friends, but also little Tommy down the street because his parents are regular church-goers and you’ve seen them a few times at different community events.  In my opinion, it has nothing to do with who’s values are better or worse – in fact, the argument can be made that the stigma that some Christians place on wealthy Americans may do more harm than good – but rather a realistic look on what effects the deterioration of community has on society.  The more people that individuals feel responsible for, the greater the community.  In a society that praises individual accomplishments, we have abandoned our obligation of providing for one another.

__________________

This disconnect, or inability to relate to “the other” is also seen in our own religion’s history.  The intense debates on how Jesus’s message should be continued between Peter and Paul is a great example of one’s inability to understand the “other side” and Paul attempting to reconcile the two separate factions.  Does this make Peter any less of a moral figure simply because Paul’s message won out?  Not necessarily.  What it does prove, however, is that it is easy to fall victim to skewed perceptions when you refuse to include the “others” into your community.  In Peter’s case, the “others” were the Gentiles.  Doing so not only opens one’s eyes to lifestyles outside of their own, but also establishes a sense of connectedness that would not otherwise exist.  And it is with that connectedness that a healthy community – filled with wealthy and poor, black and white, christian and muslim, republican and democrat – can be firmly established.

I end by asking you one simple question.  How much do you know about your neighbors?  Do you know their names?  Where they go to church?  Where they go/went to school?  Answer these questions and then go ask one of your grandparents how much they knew about their neighbors growing up.  I believe the contrast in knowledge is reason enough to believe that the deterioration of community is one, of many, reasons that Americans do not feel obligated to help America’s poorest citizens.