Be The Change or Be the Victim?

In a previous post on the upcoming Presidential election, I pointed out that a good deal of it comes down to trust. We humans are social animals, who rely on our social institutions for our well-being, but we have selfish impulses as well. A leader is someone who can influence people to voluntarily make efforts and sacrifices on behalf of the common well being, by assuring them that their efforts and sacrifices would not simply be exploited by those less cooperative and fair minded than themselves. The President of the United States is the leader of the country, not just the administrator of the federal government, which is just one of many institutions in our society. And in world affairs, influence and cooperation are the only tools he has. In a circumstance when the nation is facing a series of crises, can either of the candidates for that office inspire the trust required for some people, more people, to be willing to cooperate and change their behavior? We may get an idea tonight.

I have been given an opportunity to attend a summit on community service, at which the two candidates for President will speak. Service Nation, the group holding the summit, “is a national grassroots campaign that will launch immediately following the ServiceNation Summit in New York City. It will rally the voices of ordinary Americans behind the idea that citizen service can strengthen our democracy, and help solve our most persistent social challenges and crises. These voices will call upon the next President and Congress, leaders from all sectors of society, and fellow Americans to join to create a new era of service and civic engagement in America: an era in which by 2020, 100 million Americans will volunteer time in schools, workplaces, and faith-based and community institutions each and every year (up from 61 million today), and that increasing numbers of Americans annually will commit a year of their lives to national service.”

They want Americans to sign a pledge to contribute 50 hours per year in voluntary community service, without being sentenced to it. And they seek to “honor the sacrifices of those who have gone before us, and to bequeath a stronger and more just nation to future generations” by pledging to “challenge cynicism, and to serve over a lifetimes to secure a brighter future for all.”

If Service Nation wants to challenge cynicism, they’ve invited the right blogger. We are in an era in which the national motto has been “I want for me now,” in which our social institutions – governmental, business, even non-profit – have in large part been captured by self-dealers, and contributions of time and money to those institutions have often been shoveled out as fast as people can shovel them in. The group’s motto is “Be the Change,” after Gandhi’s assertion that “you must be the change you want to see in the world.” It is ironic that this group, which has attracted many of the leaders of those institutions to its summit, has chosen this moment to launch, a moment when – based on all I have seen – I’m about ready to write off many of our failed institutions as irredeemable. Would those who are called to be the change merely be the victims to a greater extent?

The two candidates certainly can tell their own story. Senator McCain followed several generations of ancestors in military service, and then public service. Which is ironic because even many community minded conservatives are unwilling to pay additional taxes for to the government for more community benefits, or merely to stave off federal, state and local bankruptcy, on the grounds that those who control the government would merely transfer more money to themselves, leaving the community and the future no better off than it was. Senator Obama, in his younger days, chose to work as a community organizer rather than moving into a high paid career. Which is ironic because many liberals are more willing to pay higher taxes rather than to donate their own time and money, due to a suspicion that if such contributions are voluntary they will merely be shirked by the selfish.

And given the preferred form of social contribution among Democrats and liberals, among those willing to make social contributions, it is ironic that a summit on voluntary community service is being held in New York. We pay among the highest state and local taxes. As for the statistical evidence on our volunteering, well more on that later.

While the two candidates for President have a service story to tell, many other summit participants do not. One of the main backers of the event is the AARP. Is that organization going to talk about what the comfortably retired owe to younger generations, who will be worse off? Or try to get younger generations to sacrifice even more, to make up for what people haven’t been willing to do for the past 30 years? You have the leaders of financial corporations, who paid themselves princely sums while engaging in business practices that left their companies, at this very moment, struggling to survive with the help of younger generation’s future earnings via government bailouts. The head of the UFT is here. In many jurisdictions teachers voluntarily help with after-school activities. They have a word for those who do so here. Scab. It’s fine that teachers are paid for their time, but when the cost of allowing them to retire at 55 instead of 62 kicks in, expect those activities to disappear unless parents step up.

You have the heads of universities, which have increased their tuition by far more than inflation each year as professors earned higher salaries for smaller class loads while accounting for a shrinking share of total staff. And you have state and local government leaders, who will be asking people to pay much higher taxes for diminished services as the debts, pensions and retiree health care from the past are paid for. Will people need to volunteer, more and more, because their future tax dollars have already been spent or promised off the top?

As it happens, it is likely that every member of my family would meet the Service Nation pledge or come close. It is expected. So my cynicism does not stem from an unwillingness to serve. It stems from a deep dissatisfaction with the culture of the a country in which, in the wake of 9/11, the only sacrifice the President felt willing to ask of the American people was to go shopping with borrowed money they could not afford to pay back.

When I ran for state legislature four years ago, one of my four main themes was as follows:

“Some people are grateful for what they have and try, over the course of their lives, to contribute more to others than they have received themselves. I am very grateful to my neighbors who have worked to build up our community, running soccer leagues, organizing the rehabilitation of the parks, working to improve the schools, providing services as volunteers in churches and other organizations, and taking care of their family members. I am also grateful for the many assets and institutions provided to us by prior generations, assets and institutions that contribute to our lives today. New York State politics, however, is dominated by those seeking to leave life with a "profit" by imposing a loss on others. Quickly acclimated with and bored by whatever they have, made to feel envious and inadequate by television commercials selling what they don't, far too many people feel needy today. Our state capital is a place where people are focused on themselves.”

“If you are a net contributor to those with greater needs, you are a good person. If you are a net contributor to those with a greater sense of entitlement, and a greater willingness and ability to work the system, then you are a sucker. Our state politicians have become perpetual incumbents by pandering to the organized selfish, and telling them what they want to hear. As the un-politician, I would tell it like it is, and try to let the losers know who they are. In doing so, I would represent the responsible and considerate people of this community and this state, and would allow their voices, for once, to be heard. And I would work to ensure that their net contributions go to the needy, and to future generations, not to the greedy.”

OK Senators, after spending much of your time talking about the billions in tax breaks an subsidies you plan to hand out, convince me that you would lead the people who want to be the change, not those who want to milk the system till it finally collapses.