BEST OF JIM COOK
July 7, 2006
Our daily newspaper ran several articles about
alcoholism and crime at one of
Minnesota
’s Indian reservations. Teenage boys and girls had been thrown in
jail for drunkenness as many as fifteen times. There had been a brutal
murder. I wrote the following letter to the editor about this problem.
"After one hundred years of subsidies native
Americans are worse off. When is the left going to figure out that
giving money to people that they didn’t earn is destructive to them?
Liberals have done more harm than good with their runaway social
sympathy. It’s time to acknowledge this failure.
"Instead you run an editorial that suggests
the cure is to ‘listen to the elders.’ Do you expect us to take
such sentimental fluff seriously? Stop the government money and let
people sink or swim. That’s the cure, and the only cure, no matter
how you deny it or search for another answer."
My letter didn’t get published, so I e-mailed
the following. "My letter on
Leech
Lake
presented a viewpoint that was not covered by any of the other
articles or opinions. Furthermore, it’s crucial to understanding the
behavioral disaster on the reservations.
"Solicitations I receive from native
American charities claim a 90% alcoholism rate on Minnesota
reservations, yet your lead Sunday editorial suggests that reservation
problems can somehow be solved by ‘listening to the elders.’
"You served up this bizarre opinion and
nobody got to counter it. I believe my letter didn’t get published
because of your editor’s liberal bias. Either that or your editor is
inept in presenting all sides of an issue. Please note that I tried a
second time. I believe my letter rankled liberal sentiments and was
therefore rejected."
The whole matter caused me to think a lot about
why liberals can’t seem to see the obvious. We’ve been giving
billions of dollars to millions of people for decades. Anyone can see
they are worse off for it. The number of people living on government
subsidies continues to escalate. Bad behavior has become an epidemic.
Without any requirement to work people begin to get bored. Too often,
they turn to wrongdoing for stimulation.
In 1946, the
U.S.
began to send monthly checks to inhabitants of an island in the
Pacific that was next to an atomic bomb testing site. These
self-sufficient islanders fished as a way of life. "Sixty
Minutes" did a segment on these people after forty years of
living on the dole. Since they had no need to fish anymore, many had
forgotten how to fish. With no requirement to do anything, their
alcohol consumption skyrocketed and social problems set in. Piles of
beer cans and other junk marred the islands appearance.
Nothing damages people more than giving them
money they didn’t earn. We have evolved through hardship. Economic
challenges and financial struggles make us what we are. Remove the
demand to make our own way and behavior deteriorates.
It’s hardly an original thought. They’ve been
writing about it for centuries. "An idle man’s brain is the
devil’s workshop," wrote Bunyan. "I look at indolence as a
sort of suicide," wrote
Chesterfield
.
Beecher
said, "If you are idle you are on the road to ruin, and there are
few stopping places upon it. It is rather a precipice than a
road." Emerson wrote, "He is base – and that is the one
base thing in the universe – to receive favors and render
none." Proverbs express the absolute wisdom of the ages.
"Idleness rusts the mind." "To do nothing teaches to do
ill." "Industry is the parent of virtue."
"Idleness is the root of all evil." "He becometh poor
that dealeth with a slack hand." "It is a great weariness to
do nothing."
Two hundred and fifty years ago the religious thinker Swedenborg
described a process which goes on today in subsidizing the worst
elements of society. "It is believed by many that love to the
neighbour consists in giving to the poor, in assisting the needy, and
in doing good to every one; but charity consists in acting prudently,
and to the end that good may result. He who assists a poor or needy
villain does evil to his neighbour through him; for through the
assistance which he renders he confirms him in evil, and supplies him
with the means of doing evil to others."
Every day incalculable numbers of children in our country are sexually
and physically abused. They witness violence, mayhem and depravity.
They hear vile language and often they go unsupervised, free to use
drugs and keep the hours they choose. Their parents are totally unfit
for child raising, yet they are subsidized all the more. Twenty-five
million children live in homes without fathers. Two million have
parents in prison. How is it that a problem of this magnitude, surely
the greatest problem facing any nation, could be such a neglected
topic?
In order to confront this behavioral disaster, the left would have to
admit responsibility for engineering social programs that have gone
astray. After all, it is their social sympathy and their politics that
engineered the government schemes that weakened so many people. The
policies they support are the cause of much of the misery they are so
compassionate about. They meant to do good, but they did harm. It’s
not easy for them to admit that their epic social blunder has ruined
the character of so many people.
Because the left will refuse to see their
mistake, they will continue to resist any kind of solution. So there
is little or no hope that anything will change. We will continue to
take increasing amounts of money from those who earned it and give it
to increasing numbers of those who didn’t. Today both parties
enthusiastically ladle out billions in subsidies. Unfortunately, the
recipients will be all the worse for it. Does anybody seriously think
this is going to have a good ending?