You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Can we once and for all drop the "to fight for the poor, you must be poor" nonsense? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
jpgray Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-31-07 09:45 PM
Original message
Can we once and for all drop the "to fight for the poor, you must be poor" nonsense?
Advertisements [?]
Hypocrisy? Nonsense. A friend of mine once asked why Vitter or Craig deserved condemnation for hypocrisy whereas Gore does not for consuming quite a bit of fuel and energy in his advocation for environmental causes. Where does FDR get off pretending to fight poverty while cooling his heels in Hyde Park? Where do the Kennedys get off pushing for the lower classes while they flit about on yachts off the coast of Nantucket? Why don't those cases elicit the same cry of "hypocrisy!" from me?

Because empowering the powerless, providing opportunity to those who lack it, and protecting those who lack protection is something all citizens of this nation should make their business. It doesn't matter how rich or poor you are, it doesn't matter how luxurious or destitute your lifestyle may be--anyone who works or speaks towards that noble goal is doing necessary work.

Living in luxury and possessing vast wealth does not exclude you from this responsibility. Such advantages are of course -evidence- of profound social inequity, but this does not blunt the fact that they also maximize one's opportunity and resources to highlight and combat that social inequity. This unequal distribution of resources is an unfortunate fact, and so long as it exists we should expect the -most- effort from those who enjoy its benefits, not the least. More than anything, we should not seek to punish those wealthy, luxurious individuals who -do- break the mold and advocate for the poorest and most desperate with cries of "hypocrisy!" Those cries are more deservedly aimed at those individuals who use their wealth to benefit themselves and their kind, who seek to bully, isolate, and control others while promoting their own freedom and opportunity.

"How dare the rich care about the poor?" How dare they not? "Give up your wealth and your luxury before you dare claim to fight for the least among us!" Keep all of them if you like--one person's wealth has a minimal effect on society, but a few changed policies and a steady drumbeat of activism from that person can make all the difference in the world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC