Dependent (adjective) 1. relying on someone or something
else for aid, support, etc.
--Random
House Dictionary
One of my
favorite architectural gems is the Rhode Island State House in Providence, just down Route 95. “Little
Rhody” boasts a grand capitol building, topped by the fourth largest
freestanding dome in all the world. But it is what sits on top of that dome
which has my interest these days, a statue called “The Independent Man”. Weighing in at some 500 pounds and 11 feet
high, this lone man, herculean and powerful, perched 278 feet above the ground,
is a symbol of human freedom and human independence.
How we Americans
love this image and ideal of a human going it alone, the lone man or woman who
makes it all on their own with little or no help from anyone. The entrepreneur
who starts a company from scratch in a garage and then reaps billions for
herself. The solider who singlehandedly storm’s the enemy fort and saves the
day. The cowboy who confronts the town
bandit at high noon, shoots him (of course never in the back) and then rides
off into the sunset, dependent on absolutely no one. Even his best friend is just a horse. Cue
music. Roll the credits.
Oh if only
human life were that simple or easy. Sure
I strive to be as independent as the next person. I’m proud of the fact that
much of what I’ve achieved in 51 years has come about because of individual
effort and yet the truth is: I didn’t get here on my own. Not by a long
shot. I’m not only self made. I’m God-made. I’m communally created too, the
product of a family that loves me, a faith which sustains me and even a government
which at times has really helped me. I depended and still am very dependent upon
people and institutions, even here in the land of the free. I need the whole
society to support me at times on my life journey.
I’m
dependent. I am “The Dependent Man”, though something tells me I won’t get a
statue anytime soon.
For these
days the notion of depending upon others, especially the government, is viewed
with derision and contempt in many political circles and on too many campaign
trails. Candidates decry a so-called “culture
of dependence” which has overtaken America. Pundits speak of
entitlement programs like Medicare (health insurance for the old), Medicaid
(health care for the poor) and Social Security (pension for the aged and
disabled) as if these are a civic plague, examples of human weakness and an
inability to just pull ourselves up by our bootstraps.
This aggressive
anti-government, anti-assistance, and anti-dependency philosophy is best summed
up in the title of a recent best selling book: “A Nation of Moochers: America’s
Addiction to Getting Something for Nothing” by Charles J. Sykes. As the author claims, “In the wake of the
Great Recession, we’ve shifted from a culture of celebrating and encouraging
those who are productive and hardworking, to a culture where handouts,
bailouts, freebies and entitlements dominate.”
To depend
upon Uncle Sam for a check to help pay the rent or to buy some food for your
family—is that now a moral failing? To depend upon the government for some
extra help to pay for fuel oil in the winter or to receive unemployment
compensation when you just can’t find a job--is this so terrible? To depend
upon Beacon Hill or Washington
D.C. for assistance, in the hope
of helping the “least of these” our neighbors: the poor, the disabled, the
homeless, and the sick. Is this really so
unreasonable?
Me? I know my
family and I are dependent upon the government sometimes. My retired Mom and
Grandfather receive excellent healthcare courtesy of a federal government
program. As a veteran my father was very well cared for in the last years of
his life in part because of the Veterans Administration. I went to a public
university because my neighbors in Massachusetts
paid taxes making tuition affordable for a middle class kid. I went to grad school because Uncle Sam
backed my loans. Parishioners of mine, between jobs and struggling, never lost
their health insurance because the state I live in guarantees health care for
every citizen and part of that tab is picked up by the feds. I once worked with developmentally disabled
adults whose housing costs were subsidized by the government. Otherwise they would not have been able to
live and work on their own.
Are all of
these folks really “moochers”? I’m no socialist, to use the pejorative swipe
some so casually toss around. I work for a charitable institution which also
takes responsibility for doing our small part in housing the homeless and
feeding the hungry. I too worry about rising government debt. I know that all
our entitlement programs need to be reformed both through reasonable tax
increases and benefit cuts, something neither Presidential candidate has the
courage to say out loud. I get
that.
But as a
person of faith I passionately and fully believe that our nation has a moral
and ethical responsibility to help folks who are in need, who are hurting, the
ones who have been beaten down by the harder edges of bare knuckles
capitalism. No political philosophy
should ever trump our communal commitment to show compassion to our neighbors. No miraculous economic system or “opportunity
society” will ever be able to completely eliminate human suffering, poverty or
the dependency of the few on the many for help.
I’m with
Jesus, when he says, quoting the Old Testament book of Deuteronomy, “There will
always be poor people in the land. Therefore I command you to be openhanded
toward your brothers and sisters and toward the poor and needy in your land.”
Sometimes I’m
independent as a human being and citizen. But sometimes I and millions of our
fellow citizens are dependent and just need some help and care from the
government. When did that become such a
civic sin?
No comments:
Post a Comment