Politics of Personal Responsibility

The Politics of Personal Responsibility

A few years ago a house burned to the ground.  Houses burn to the ground every year, this is not that surprising.  But what made this story heartbreaking was that the fire department watched it burn to the ground and did nothing.  Why?  Well the owner had not paid the fee to have the fire department put out the fire.  You see, in this particular community, you had to pay a fee (not a tax) to have the fire department put out a fire on your property.  This elderly gentleman didn’t pay the fee not because he didn’t want to.  He simply forgot, or lost the paperwork.  When the fire department showed up, he offered to pay the fee right then and there.  The neighbor offered to pay the fee right then and there.  But the fire department refused the small fee ($20?) and the house burned to the ground.  If there was a child or a person in the house would they have put out the fire?  Well...the guy didn’t pay the fee so I guess they would have died.

Of course this story got picked up by local and national news.  Progressives raised money for the man to help him rebuild.  Conservatives talked about the politics of personal responsibility.  That the guy should have paid the fee and shouldn’t have to expect his neighbors and others who “played by the rules” to pay his fee or his share of the fee.  Progressives used this as an opportunity to talk about community based taxes (we pay taxes so that when our house catches fire, the fire department can help put it out), Conservatives used this as an example of a person who didn’t want to take responsibility and thus, screw him (we have a responsibility to follow through with things, and if something happens, we have to face the facts that we didn’t follow through as we should have).

On Saturday, a week after the Trayvon Martin  ruling that George Zimmerman acted in self- defense and was let go, I got a call from my conservative Mother-in-Law.  Typically I do not talk politics with my conservative relatives.  They know my political bent, I know theirs.  I love them and respect them and appreciate their passion but, often times, a discussion becomes more of a “convincing.”  As if there’s an ultimate goal of not discussing what is and isn’t wrong with a certain subject matter but I HAVE TO CONVINCE YOU THAT YOU’RE WRONG.  Discussions become competition.  It’s not one thing to discuss the pros-and-cons of any sort of argument (i.e.:  apples v. oranges), but somehow you’ve got to convince that other person that they’re wrong and “win.”

A few years ago I saw this first hand when my atheist best friend commented negatively on a mutual friend’s faith.  What then transpired was a conversation blog between, at its height, 8 to 10 people, all weighing in.  This went on for weeks and when we finally printed up the “conversation” or “debate” it went well over 150 pages.  What were found in these comments/discussions were passionate feelings revolving around faith, belief, structure, history, speculation.  Angry words were spoken.  (I often played “peace-keeper”).  Keyboards were pounded.  Fingers were figuratively pointed and after those weeks and pages I honestly do not think minds were changed.  No one “won.”  Did the needle move on anyone’s faith scale?  Sure.  Did it help us all to think about things in different ways?  You betcha.  But did anyone who had a faith in God suddenly wake up and say:  “Golly, Jason’s right!  I don’t believe in God anymore.”  Or did an Atheist suddenly say:  “By gum, Eric is right!  I believe there IS a God!”  But I think, honestly, it made us all think.  For a while, it made us all relate to, and understand where that other person was coming from.  It didn’t mean that we agreed with their ultimate understanding or rationale, but it did make us all a bit more three-dimensional.

Back to Saturday.  My mother-in-law called to discuss something innocuous that seemed more of an excuse to just bring up the George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin case.  And, in the past, I would let the comment zip on by like I barely heard it but I couldn’t this time and so it was on.  She was passionate about how Mr. Zimmerman was just defending himself from the boy who, she reminded me, had marijuana in his system and that’s been known to “make people paranoid and aggressive” (note:  the pot users I’ve known in my day are the least aggressive people I know and maybe a little paranoid that someone took their last pop-tart).  She made her points after points but I kept reminding her of one simple fact:  “George Zimmerman, with a loaded gun, got out of his car and followed the boy who had done nothing illegal.”

She argued back that Trayvon attacked Zimmerman.  I reminded her that he got out of his car and followed Trayvon.  She argued that Zimmerman was the “only one that got hurt” – I, of course, reminded her that Trayvon was KILLED.  And then reminded her that Zimmerman got out of his car.  She brought up the fact that Trayvon beat Zimmerman’s head against the concrete and I reminded her that ZIMMERMAN GOT OUT OF HIS CAR AND PUT HIMSELF INTO THAT SITUATION.

In other words, I was stating that this is the politics of personal responsibility.  Just like the guy with the burned down house.  If the guy pays the bill.  If he does what he’s SUPPOSED TO DO, then the fire department comes and puts out the fire.

If Zimmerman doesn’t have a loaded gun.  If he doesn’t get out of his car.  If he returns to his car when the police tell him to.  If he doesn’t stalk Trayvon.  If he doesn’t speak to Trayvon.  Then a 17 year old kid is still alive today.

I completely understand if Zimmerman follows Trayvon because he saw him breaking into a house.   I completely understand Zimmerman following Trayvon if he was waving a gun around and being a threat to people.  But...since Trayvon had done nothing wrong, all the responsibility, including stalking and killing an innocent boy falls directly on Zimmerman.  NOT on Trayvon.

It all started and ended with Zimmerman...but for some, he’s a hero.  A child murderer who can’t take personal responsibility is a hero, while others make excuses for him...?  I don’t think so.