We're either all in it together or we are not. That's the feeling I had as I listened to Governor Spitzer's soaring rhetoric about being "one state." For some time, as far as our state government has been concerned, whenever some people, groups, or places have had a need, we've all been in it together. And whenever other people, groups or places have had a need, they have been told to take more responsibility for themselves. The inequities have been generational, regional, and in some cases simply insiders vs. outsiders. The optimist in me wants to take Spitzer's words as a sign of future fairness, and accountability for those with better deals. The cynic see it as a call for the losers to stop pressing their claims, and accept plans that could perhaps make them a little better off — and the winners better off as well.
I don't read much fiction, but if there was one book I'd like to see made into a movie, it is Bread and Wine, a political, ethical, religious drama set in Mussolini's Italy. Information about the author that came out later makes part of it a kind of confession; the run up to war at the heart of the book has contemporary echos. Not only would such a movie show many Americans the conditions in southern Italy that caused their ancestors to leave, but the book contains a number of speeches and dialogues worth thinking about.
One such discussion is between the lead character, a revolutionary disguised as a priest hiding out in a poor village, and a large landowner. The landowner is complaining of his hardships, when the priest asks about the landless peasants. The response:
"It's true they are not well off, and if they stay here to scratch the earth, it is just because the emigration has been cut off. But they are better off than I am. They are used to suffering."
The tendency to allocate benefits and burdens according to a relative sense of entitlement has permeated our political system, nowhere more so than in New York State. It is the feeling of a need to to be protected from those with a greater sense of entitlement that has caused me to question the value of contributing, in money or otherwise, to government and other community institutions that do not demand reciprocity. Remember, govenment was for centuries assumed to be on the side of the better off, and "liberalism" initially meant less taxes and government spending, not more. There is a difference between being generous and being a mark.
I can only hope that when the time comes for choices that are "not easy," the "peasants are used to suffering" approach is not chosen again even though it is the most politically palatable. I won't feel comfortable until I hear additional challenges to those with the greatest sense of entitlement. We're either all in it together or we are not, and if things continue the way they have been, I'll be glad if at some point we are not. At least my charitable contributions go to those worse off than I am. No so my taxes.