An interesting debate over at National Review online at The Corner between David French and Kathryn Jean Lopez about the cost of depravity among the poor.
In this post, Mr French pretty much lays a huge blame of depravity on the poor. And, I do agree that there is a problem among many who are in the lower economic classes.
And a part of it is a welfare state that to a huge extent rewards such behavior. In Mr. French's post, he cites an article by the great Walter Russell Mead in which some research seems to indicate that the poor are no longer rooted in religion. That according to research, it is the educated and financially well off that are more adherents to faith.
Again, I tend to question that research and the conclusions.
But if that is true, I would like Mr. French, Mr. Mead and the researchers to explain the depravity of popular culture? Explain how that emulates the poor and or underclass.
Kathryn Jean Lopez had this rejoinder to Mr. French in a later post. Although much shorter, but I think is on to something.
I kind of alluded to it above. That there is a helluva lot of depravity among the upper classes.
But, to go to he point that Mr. French is making is that depravity is not costly to the taxpaying American. And he is right. But what he missed and what Miss Lopez said and here is what I think is the tail wagging the dog.
Look at the celubtard culture. That it is OK to have children out of wedlock (Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt come to mind). It is OK to have multiple sexual partners. That it is OK to be a stoner, a hardcore druggie or an alcoholic with no consequence. That it is OK to, oh kill your ex-wife and her companion and not be convicted of the crime. The list goes on and on.
Here is what I am getting at.
Because of the depravity from the elites, the poor feel a sense of entitlement. Because of the elites behavior essentially telling all that it is A-OK. And why, because more than likely it will not be behavior that taxpayers have to foot the bill. If people see that there is no shame in abhorrent behavior, they will come to believe that they can do it too.
And the larger cost is that to society as a whole. And until we find a way to return shame for depravity for all and not just some, you will see the result that we have today.
In a later post, Mr. French cites scary statistics. Here is an eye-opener:
36.5 percent of female-led single-parent families are poor compared with 6.4 percent of married two-parent families, according to this Heritage study.
And no doubt those poor unmarried women are on some form of government assistance. And that is a huge problem. But again, would that be the case if we had to so-called stigma of shame attached to bad behavior?
I think that is what Mr. French was alluding to. But by implying that people with means can go right ahead and be depraved because they can afford it is a kind of form of class warfare.
I treat all equally. I do not care if one is of means, but it is not good to be a single parent. It is not good to be a druggie, a stoner or akly because you can go into some so-called rehab facility.
I think that Mr. French would make a devastating argument if he included the overall depravity of the elites as well as the poor. And how both are costly and devastating to society as a whole. And Miss Lopez was trying to nudge him in that direction.
And this is the crux of the debate over the size and scope of government. Which is why all aspects need to be included in this debate as well as the debate over government.
No comments:
Post a Comment