Luck

I do my best to try to understand folks who don’t agree with the way I see things.  In this age of political contention 24/7, it can be a bit of a challenge.  

A few weeks ago, Bill Moyers spoke with Jonathan Haidt about the differences between progressive/liberal and conservative philosophies.  Haidt’s new book, The Righteous Mind:  Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion, is due out mid-March. 

My biggest take-away from the program was that liberals have a very high interest in compassion for others.  Libertarians, on the other extreme, score very low in that area, mainly because they hold that individual freedoms make one responsible for self.  Ergo, assistance from government is detrimental to personal freedoms.  I read in this morning’s paper that Ron Paul would abolish personal income tax in order to reduce what the government could provide for its citizens.  

Another interesting point is that liberals don’t venerate the structure of business and government as American sacral like the conservatives do.  We’ve all heard the conservative axiom of shrinking government so small you can drown it in a bathtub.  Such would allow business to control the markets without government interference, from their point of view.  

Surely Americans from both sides of the aisle agree that the deficit needs cutting and something has to be done about revenues.  Conservatives, I think, are fine with cutting taxes and reducing revenues, while progressives are more about requiring those who have more to be taxed more so all benefit from this nation’s economic bounty.  Reducing government revenue would help the conservatives shrink government, while more taxes from the rich would allow the liberals to provide a broader safety net and more opportunity for those lower on the economic scale.  

I’ve given a lot of thought to these differences over time, especially since watching the Moyers & Company episode a couple weeks ago.  I most definitely am a liberal, no doubt.  Many of my family and friends?  Not nearly.  I can remember concluding a few winters ago that my brother is a conservative with the attitude that somebody out there might get something they didn’t earn.  A Fox News devotee, he earned his, by God, and everybody else can work hard to get what they deserve, too.

I understand a good work ethic.  I encourage everybody to work hard and find financial success.  Problem is, from my point of view, some of us have a far easier path to success than others.  And that is the point of this blog today:  Luck. 

I surely had no choice about being born a white American, but as one, I grew up in a middle class Midwest suburb with decent schools, little neighborhood violence, two grocery stores within walking distance, and a park three blocks away where my parents could send me to play without worrying about my coming home alive.  That just simply isn’t true for a whole lot of Americans born into poverty who don’t have the capability of moving to a safer place.  So many families are stuck in a cycle of little opportunity that is difficult, if not next to impossible to emerge from.  And now in a country where good paying manufacturing jobs -- that don’t need high priced educations -- are fewer and farther between, conditions seem even harsher for the disadvantaged.

So I can’t help but conclude that I was damned lucky to be given the life I was born into.  Dad worked.  Mom stayed home.  Both provided seven kids a comfortable house with three squares a day.  We all went to Catholic schools, which was another big sacrifice for a one-earner family.  Life was safe.  Life was good. 

For many like me, I’ve taken that advantage and passed it along to my kids.  Both Jenni and Kelly got good educations and wonderful opportunities.  If I had been born poor, I could not have provided what their mother and I gave them.  

Did I earn this good life that I have?  Sure, I worked hard in my career, so in that sense, yes.  But on a much broader scale, I was really lucky.  If my father had been born into a family where he had only his mom to rely on, or he couldn’t find good enough work to clothe and feed seven kids, my life would have been very different.  

So I guess that’s my question to conservatives:  Shouldn’t we take the good luck we’ve had in our successful lives and offer that same opportunity we were blessed with to others who weren’t so lucky?  Sure seems like the compassionate, Christian thing to do, you know?    

***

Lent began yesterday, and for many Christians that means a period of contemplation and prayer about life and death that culminates in the rebirth of Easter.  

I must admit, there have been many lenten seasons when I didn’t do anything special.  I don’t know how it will turn out this year either, since I’m lousy at New Year’s resolutions, but I’d like to try something special.

At my place on the Great Mandela, life is good and I have everything I need.  But do I know the truth about life?  I am going to try to contemplate the question, What do I have to give up to find that someone beneath the cloak?  Like the young man in William Faulkner's short story 'The Bear.'

The Persian poet Jelaluddin Rumi tackles such metaphysical issues in his 20,000 some poems, most of which have not yet been translated into English.  But I have a couple copies of Rumi translations gifted by friends that I am going to ponder through.  Should be a good way to reconsider what’s important in my life.  I’ll be addressing The Spirit of the Universe in my meditation. 

Today’s Elder Idea:  Lent provides us with a reality check, where we can step up and look at who we are.  We are invited to journey inward to encounter and confront all that separates us from God.  It is also a time to journey outward to encounter and confront all that causes pain, damage, and separation from others. 

Shannon Ferguson Kelly

for the daily Episcopal Relief & Development Lenten series

For the Jonathan Haidt interview, see: Moyers & Co.

Image lifted from the internet without permission.