Does The Left value or believe in Personal Responsibility?

[Matariki]

A few recent threads got me thinking about this. I noticed that these threads, especially ones that are about people who can't take care of their numerous children, get quite heated. The argument seems to boil down to societal vs. personal responsibility. One person went so far as to say: "this fetish for personal responsibility is nothing more than the defense of George W Bush".

As progressives, I think we can see how our society can actually make it difficult for people to take care of themselves and their families. We can see the causes of poverty in unequal education, corporation's profits over livable wages, catastrophic health care costs. We can see the injustice in this and (hopefully) work to correct it.

This is one of the biggest breakdowns in communication with conservatives. Especially when addressing the need for social programs. They see the personal responsibility side of it but are blind to the root causes which are often unjust social policy aimed against the poor and working classes. When talking to conservatives (who often seem to be ‘empathy challenged’) we need to address the *why* of it - why it’s better for everyone to have access to at least the bare essentials. Not because people are somehow entitled to being taken care of, but that it serves our society as a whole when there aren’t people homeless and/or starving. That a strong and equal education system will strengthen our nation and our standing in the world. That people making livable wages strengthens the economy.

Conversely, are progressives equally blind to the personal responsibly side of the equation when it comes to people taking care of themselves? Do we argue that people's choices and actions are completely dictated by the class they find themselves in? Frankly, I cringe when reading posts that seem to imply (if a person is poor anyway) they have absolutely no control over their decisions or the things that happen to them. That implication of passivity can’t possibly do anyone any good.

Flame away if you will.

(edited for idiotic spelling)

[WI_DEM]

1. We unlike the conservatives want govt. out of our personal lives

which is why we are pro-choice. We don't want govt. telling us what we do in our bedrooms which is why we are for gay marriage. We don't want government in our schools which is why we are against the increasing intrusion of mandating such things as school prayer. We are more likely than the fundies to support keeping the family unit together. We want a mother or father who has a drug problem to get help not prison and then to be able to return to the family. We want gay couples to be able to adopt. We are the party of personal responsibility and personal choices.

[Matariki]

3. well put.

[crazed1x]

21. hmmm..

which is why we are pro-choice. We don't want govt. telling us what we do in our bedrooms which is why we are for gay marriage. We don't want government in our schools which is why we are against the increasing intrusion of mandating such things as school prayer. We are more likely than the fundies to support keeping the family unit together. We want a mother or father who has a drug problem to get help not prison and then to be able to return to the family. We want gay couples to be able to adopt. We are the party of personal responsibility and personal choices.

If the left is for personal responsibility, how come democrats are always trying to ban or further restrict firearms?

[Toots]

27. How exactly do firearms promote personal responsibility

Oh I know we can use Iraq as a very good example. The Decider in his great wisdom decided to leave weapons in the hands of all the people so as to promote personal responsibility. It is working like a charm wouldn't you say?

[crazed1x]

29. because

How exactly do firearms promote personal responsibility

Because you're trusting people to responsible for their own safety and defense.

[Toots]

30. Isn't it amazing how you wingers had no concerns for over forty years

while Democrats controlled Congress. America slept well at night because they knew they were protected. It is only under Republican leadership that you all become very afraid. Afraid of Democrats taking your guns, afraid of basically everything. Only under Republican leadership has America trembled in fear. So afraid that they are willing to give up all that is sacred about America. The US Constitution. You would cast it away without a thought out of shear terror. Why? Mathmatically there is far more chance you will be struck by lightning than experience a terrorist attack but you quiver in fear. I truly feel sorry for you.

[Hemperor]

116. what? the gun control debate happened largely under clinton

and most supporters of gun rights have been supporters for thier entire lives...

the responsible ownership and use of a firearm is not only a proven crime deterrent (cato) but teaches an important lesson in responsibility

and what the hell was all that about wanting to throw away the constitution and trembling in fear? all because he/she is in favor of gun rights?

get a gripppp

[Warren DeMontague]

47. always?

I could honestly give a shit about personal firearms. I'm not sure why someone needs to keep a cache of assualt rifles in their basement, but I'm enough of a realist to understand that the American love of weaponry isn't going anywhere any time soon. Although I think there's way too much gun violence in our society, I lean towards the left-libertarian side of the spectrum, and "Gun Control" has never been a front burner issue for me.

Of course, most Americans like birth control, too, but that hasn't stopped the republican party from pursuing an agenda leading towards criminalization of the birth control pill, has it?

[WI_DEM]

48. that is GOP propaganda

Dems have done nothing to take away guns from honest sportsen, but we do want to keep "cop killer" bullets out the hands of criminals and weapons which no ordianry sportsman needs such as machine guns out of the pocession of criminals. Funny, how the police seem to back the Democrats up on this and yet we are supposed to be weak on law and order?

Now to turn it around, if your republicans are such strong civil libertarians why are they always trying to tell people what they can or cannot do in the privacy of their homes or between their doctor?

[Warren DeMontague]

51. Because-- "My business is my business!"

And, incidentally, Your business is my business, too, sinner.

[omega minimo]

73. Damn Authoritarians!

:spray: :hi:

[Warren DeMontague]

92. Damn straight.

Amelia didn't like being told what to do, either! :hi:

[EstimatedProphet]

53. "Democrats" aren't

SOME Democrats believe in banning. Some Republicans do too.

[sendero]

83. Understand..

... that this is not by any means a universal Democratic position (gun control).

There are many of us who are against the "assault" weapons ban, as well as any other unreasonable restrictions on the ownership of firearms by law abiding Americans.

Personally, I will tell you this: the right overblows the Dems positions on "gun control" to create an unwarranted "they want to take your guns" boogeyman pretty routinely and secondly more and more pols are abandoning earlier positions in opposition to lawful firearm ownership.

There are plenty of "pro-gun-rights" Dems on this board, plenty indeed.

[athena]

99. Why is the right for banning recreational drugs?

If the right-wing is for personal responsibility, then why are right-wingers so obsessed with banning recreational drugs? Shouldn't people know that drugs are bad for their health? Why is banning guns different from banning recreational drugs?

You could say the same thing for abortion and gay marriage, really.

[eccles12]

38. Do you mean for everyone or just those not born into wealth and privilege?

I'm asking.

[deaniac21]

41. We don't want government in our schools? Are you for

dismantling the Department of Education?

[Greyhound]

54. With the exception of the thousands of "nanny-state" laws and

regulations. If, OTOH, you don't comply with our wishes, we just love to pass a new laws to compel you, through threat of violence, because We Know Best! :kick:

[bananas]

2. There are a lot of threads I don't read

and I'm glad I don't.
Right now, there is only one question - will Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld be held personally responsible for their screw-ups by anybody?
The answer seems to be "NO".
And because they won't, there is no incentive for them not to screw up more.

[Psephos]

4. A most interesting post

I *love* it when we're able to look beyond the quick ideological response and instead give complex issues the measure of thought and analysis they deserve.

Your point about how a progressive approach addresses fundamental societal, as well as personal, needs is exactly the kind of thinking that can persuade others without first making their neckhairs bristle. With more voices like yours asking and then answering such fundamental questions with appeals to sense and reason rather than rhetoric and emotion, we'd be better equipped to sway centrists (and even the occasional rightie) to see things more in our terms.

Pay attention, peeps. This kind of approach works a thousand times better than hauling out the same old insults and brickbats. No, make that a million times better.

Keep on postin', kineta. :-)

Peace.

[Selatius]

5. Personal responsibility is a big part of leftist/progressive ideology

We believe in helping others, but we simply won't tolerate irresponsibility either. If you want an extreme example, look at the Nuremberg trials. You have no excuse if you willfully commit a wrong, even if you were just "following orders."

[conflictgirl]

6. I don't think either party has a corner on personal responsibility

I think that the right has successfully co-opted the idea though by advancing the idea that there is this huge mass of people out there who don't want to work and just want to live off of everyone else, and those people are the reason the rest of us can't get ahead. It's a scapegoat issue.

I don't think Dems are the party of anti-personal responsibility though either. I mean, Clinton was the one who signed the welfare reform law! I think because Dems are more often the compassionate party, those of us who defend the rights of people who are getting stomped on in society may go too far in the other direction. And particularly because the right is SO far right on this issue, when Dems argue for the rights of those people being left out, in contrast we look like we don't think personal responsibility matters. I'm not excusing the behavior of people who aren't hardworking enough; I'm sticking up for the "little guy" who is facing a shitload of hard circumstances and may not see the way out. It's easy for the rest of us to have pat answers about what people should do in a certain situation, but until you're actually in that situation, you're just making up theories.

I just try to remember, when I think about people who are grossly obese, or are illegal immigrants, or are single moms on welfare - "there but for the grace go I". Those people may have been responsible for the situations in which they find themselves. But more realistically, a huge combination of factors put them in a situation that they don't know how to fix. There is almost always more than one factor causing any particular situation.

I just think that the compassionate thing to do is have a safety net there. Compared to other Western nations, we don't do nearly enough to help the people who need it. Instead, even here on DU a lot of people find it easier to judge the person needing help as undeserving of that help.

An interesting aside - I just finished taking a social psychology course at my university. One of the things we covered was the causes of social rebellion movements. I found it interesting to say the least, considering the present state of our society. You know why people don't start riots when they see injustice going on? One of the biggest reasons is because they blame the person facing injustice for their own circumstances - ie. they deserve the treatment they're getting. I see that everywhere in our society now, and not just from conservatives.

[marions ghost]

52. well said !

Everywhere in our society --among conservatives AND liberals-- is the idea that "the person facing injustice...deserves the treatment they're getting." Obviously this allows the perpetrators a lot of latitude. This state of affairs is hurting this country in myriad ways.

Excellent points.

[barb162]

7. I'll talk about overpopulation. It was once progressive

to control the amount of people on this planet, that overpopulation was definitely not a good thing as Martha Stewart would say. That whole concept seem to have gone by the wayside with progressive thought now being along the lines of it's progressive to have as many kids as one wants. I say the earth has only so many resources and there are too many people already. On an individual level, I wonder why people have kids they can hardly support. If one thing goes wrong, they have a hard time supporting all of them. I wish all people would think very hard about not having more than two kids; replacement only at best. Not further overpopulating the planet and wasting resources shows personal responsibility. The Left doesn't ever seem to mention the overpopulation problem anymore; it's as if it is not PC anymore

[REP]

25. I Agree

On a smaller level, in the "It's So Hard" or a "A Day In The Life" threads, the story often involves someone with more than one child, either a year apart in age or one teenager and one in diapers, and I always wonder, "who thought having another child was going to make things easier?" I don't think people should be punished (and the children had no choice, though the older ones could be doing housework - like I did growing up!) and while there are cases while one year things are great and then a layoff or other disaster comes, this isn't always true; more often, times were already hard when another baby enters the family. Is it a lack of access to birth control? Lack of financial education (people of any income level need to now how to make and manage a budget)? Rosy hopes that things will change in 9 months or that "the baby will make us family"? It isn't popular to say, but having a(nother) child when things are already stretched beyond belief (income that doesn't cover all the month's needs for food, rent and utilities) is not a good way to get ahead and not really fair to the child, either.

[The2ndWheel]

31. For all the attempts to control population numbers

We still have 6.5 billion people on the planet. In the "advanced" industrial countries, the numbers may be steady or declining, but our consumption levels shoot through the roof.

I just don't think we can control our own population numbers. No species does. That's why nature gave everything a counter balance. Humans no longer have a counter balance. At least not in an immediate time frame. Resource depletion, climates shifting, that might do it.

It's not just overpopulation and overconsumption though. It's our whole way of doing things. It's our whole civilization we have to think hard about. However, we won't. No species would if they had nothing stopping them. Over the last few thousand years, we've done everything we can so far to take any balance out of the equation. It'll catch up to us at some point, but until then, we'll try and balance things ourselves, and it won't work.

[ninkasi]

8. While I do believe in personal responsibility

I must also face the fact that not all of us start life with equal chances. Let's say that life is a race...some start out much closer to the winning ribbon than others. Assuming that each person is responsible for his or her training, in order to win, the ones who start well ahead of the rest due to birth, for example, will obviously have a winning edge.

Sometimes, as in the case of Dubya, he has been able to evade responsibility for his entire life, because there has always been someone there to rescue him. If one of my sons, or yours, had lived the same lifestyle that he did until he was 40, there would have been no business ventures rescued by a father's well connected friends, or no DWI tickets that conveniently disappeared due to family influence.

It's terribly hypocritical to me that a not reformed as much as he claims alcoholic son of a rich man deigns to pontificate to the rest of us how we should live, and what moral choices we should make. When every American citizen can start life's race with an equal chance, and equal choices, then you can lecture to me about personal responsibility.

[skids]

9. Perspective is the key.

Personal responsibility is something I strongly support, which is why it pains me so to see it flung casually at people with no understanding given to their circumstances.

And yes that is a huge source of the gap between "conservative" and "liberal."

I think the best way to help people get out of extreme modes of thought is to try to build for them a picture that puts it into a different perspective than they are using.

On the one hand, if a person is an uber-victim-blamer, graphically describe what they would have to do to walk in the shoes of their object of contempt. For example, if you want to know what it's like to be morbidly obese, you'd have to simulate depression pharmeceutically, put on hot clothing, and carry 150 pounds of luggage with you for a week, and then see how hard it is to convince yourself to excercise and diet.

On the other hand, if a person is of the "society-must-fix-it-all-for-us" mindset, build a perspective of how intractable society would be if the behavior was not simultaneously addressed at the level of the individual. For example, to truly appreciate how impulse buyers negatively affect society, show how very few of them are needed to ruin an economy, and how it would be impossible to bring the numbers of them down that low without some of them engaging in a bit of self-help. Admittedly, this argument is harder to make because of the complexities of large systems, but if you put time into it you can build it up convincingly. (Basically: if just X people behave this way, Y will happen, and currently 10 times X people are behaving this way -- we can probably cure 8 times X of them of the behavior by removing contributing factors, but at least X of them are going to have to own up and come around on their own or Y will indeed happen.)

[NMMNG]

10. Of course we believe in personal responsibility

But there are limits to what one can be held personally responsible for when the playing field is not level and when unnatural restrictions are placed upon them. When the rich and privileged are given special tax breaks, vouchers to attend private schools at the taxpayers' expense and other favors they have an unnatural advantage over others in America. When the minimum wage is not enough for a person to live on for 6 months, let alone a year, how can we expect them to succeed? When members of one religion are granted superior status and rights over others, and are allowed to enact and enforce laws against others based on their religious beliefs, many suffer unwarranted restrictions on their rights and freedoms. When certain groups are discriminated against and made permanent second-class citizens--and afforded significantly fewer rights--based on who they love, they face significant impairments to their abilities to achieve the "American Dream". When the elderly and disabled are given a pittance on which to live how are they to begin to begin to do anything but struggle just to survive?


There are plenty of people who make bad decisions, but for all of them there are plenty more who simply aren't given a chance. All the personal responsibility in the world will not make up for that.

[Broken_Hero]

11. Good post....nt

[NMMNG]

14. Thank you

:hi:

[Old and In the Way]

12. Personal vs. Social Responsibility

I think people get these ideas confused. I believe that we have the ultimate responsibility in the most personal of matters: sex, childrearing, choice, religious/political beliefs. But I do think government has social obligations: providing the institutions to support social welfare. We should have an enlightened society that makes sure all are clothed, fed, and protected. That doesn't come with a religious price-tag. It means we all contribute to the greater good of our society.

[leftofthedial]

13. way more than the right

the wingnuts blame everyone else for all their wrongdoing

I don't recall one of them taking responsibility for anything until they were caught and/or indicted.

[cynatnite]

15. There has to be a balance of both...

One of the problems I have with the whole right vs. left is it's always taken to extremes by those attempting to win by using the worst examples one can think up. The argument is rarely reasoned and logical.

Personal responsibility is a must, but we can't forget about society's role in how an individual is shaped from their childhood, their peers, their neighborhood, their economics and so on. If a boy grew up in a home with a father who beat his mother no one should be surprised if he turns around and does the same thing.

While we're telling people they have to take responsibility for their actions we cannot forget the mitigating factors that put them there in the first place.

[LeftyMom]

16. "Personal Responsibility" is wingnut speak for blaming poverty on the poor

It's easy to sit back, as an advantaged person living a comfortable lifestyle and blame others for thier poor choices. What so many seem to forget (or never experienced at all) is that being poor dramaticly limits the choices and opportunities available to a person, even more so when also undereducated.

[Matariki]

18. Bill Clinton. Wingnut?

Interesting.

[LeftyMom]

19. Corporatist and market-worshiper, certainly.

Tool of wingnuts? On this issue, I'd say yes.

He may have grown up poor, but he hasn't skipped a meal in a long time, and his policies reflected that.

[bowens43]

24. You're hallucinating.

Th poster said nothing about Clinton.

[Matariki]

44. All over the news today

Bill Clinton's signing what he called the "Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act" 10 years ago.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=103&topic_id=230393

I agree with the poster above that Bill Clinton was a "Corporatist", I lost a good deal of respect for him when he signed NAFTA & CAFTA. But he is hardly a "Wingnut".

Tossing about terms like "wingnut" and "freeper" to dismiss ideas of other people on this board is hardly productive.

[CollegeDUer]

36. He certainly wasn't exactly the working class champion

You have to wonder why so many jumped ship and went Green in 2000. Part of it was constantly getting stabbed in the back by the President. True, there was a GOP Congress that should've taken some of the blame. But that doesn't mean the Democrats fought; many just rolled over.

[LittleClarkie]

17. The one's who cry the loudest about personal responsibility

ie the Republicans, tend not to mean themselves. Witness George Allen and the macaca statement. His campaign manager has blamed everyone for the ruckus instead of just owning up the the mess and going from there.

I think we believe in person responsibility, but are intelligent enough to also see that the world is not black and white, and sometimes there are reasons for what happens to people.

I personally believe that people like Linda Ronstadt and the Dixie Chicks shouldn't cry about losing record sales or concert deals when they dare to pipe up with an unpopular opinion. It comes with the territory and is part of what makes one brave for doing so. There are consequences.

[Solly Mack]

20. The Reality of Teaching a Man to Fish

Give a man a fish
and you feed him for a day
Teach a man to fish
and you feed him for a lifetime

Not so fast

Build a fence around the lake
Put up a sign that proclaims "members only"
And when the man climbs the fence to feed his family
Arrest him.
Send him to jail
And then tell him it's all about
taking personal responsibility

That's the reality in America

Don't preach personal responsibility when you're restricting opportunity and choice.

In a country where the wealthy are favored - where those with money have the power and those with power make the rules - don't tell the poor it's just a matter of working harder to get ahead.

A rich man and a poor man come before a judge for the exact same crime. Which one is most likely to go to jail? If money can buy justice, and in America it can, don't tell the poor it's just a matter of the choices they make.

Don't create a system where people get wealthy off the backs of others and then tell those others that it's all about personal responsibility when you cheat them out of their pensions and retirement plans, when you fight against paying people a decent wage, when you deny them benefits, when you decide to lay off 1000 workers because the CEO needs his next bonus.

Don't tell the poor it's about personal responsibility when skyrocketing health care costs are for the benefit of the insurance companies who pay off the politicians through campaign donations, who then turn a deaf hear to the problems of those without health care.

Don't preach personal responsibility to the poor when money buys government access in America's "deMOCKracy"

[earth mom]

56. Excellent Post!

:applause:

[Rosemary2205]

22. personal responsibility has nothing to do with bootstraps.

it also has nothing to do with tossing those who either make mistakes are never learned any better into the trash heap.

When the Republicans spew "personal responsibility" it means "I got mine so fuck you". To them it means kicking used up old farts to the curb as soon as their money runs out. It means kids unlucky enough to be born to crack addicts can enjoy prison. It means telling girls who wear makeup or sleeveless shirts it's their fault they were raped.

When a Liberal says "personal responsibility" it means giving people every opportunity for success because every life is sacred and deserves every chance possible to thrive. It means access to healthcare for every living soul. It means a decent education for every child. I means decent wages for working adults. It means more rehab and less jail. It means justice in the courts.

[Matariki]

45. It means doing something when you see social injustice

A lot of posts in this thread make me suspect that to many people here, "personal responsibility" is a dirty phrase, or right-wing code.

There are people who passively complain about problems and do nothing. Then there are people like Martin Luther King or Cindy Sheehan who take on social responsibility as if it were their personal responsibility and manage to change things. Which attitude gives you power and energy?

[bowens43]

23. 'personal reponsibility' when used by the right

is code for 'fuck the poor'.

BTW , why would you want to communicate with conservatives?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

28. Is that a serious question?

If so, the most fundamental answer is "to win elections".

If you don't talk to people who disagree with you, you can't rebut their arguments. You have no chance of learning how they think; no chance of changing their minds, no chance of convincing anyone undecided that they're wrong, and no chance of discovering that they're wrong and you're right.

A more worthwhile question is "why would you want to talk politics with people who *don't* initially disagree with you?"

[LWolf]

26. I don't speak for the "left,"

though I'm undoubtedly further "left" than most of the U.S. on most issues. I can only speak for myself:

I value personal responsibility and social responsibility equally. I think a healthy society works to balance the two.

I agree with you about the divide. I've spent my entire adult life thinking about it. Perhaps I was uniquely prepared to do just that. I spring from the poor working class; poor, but hard-working people to whom the term "charity" was foul language. I think that our pathetic excuse for a "safety net" ought to be strong and vibrant enough to catch people and stay with them long enough to see them all the way out of generational poverty.

While I really want people to have a strong work ethic, and to take personal responsibility for their own success, or lack of it, I also know that it won't happen until every last neighborhood is safe, every last person has adequate shelter, nutrition, clothing, health care, transportation, education, and employment opportunities that offer a living wage. We aren't even talking about perhaps planning someday to achieve that. I think this is the place to start.

[Kickoutthejams23]

32. For me it is a battle of personal values vs life experience.

I feel we should make the bare essentials available to everyone. Then we should understand that alot of people will, through their own actions, bite our hand as we try to feed them. Unlike Repugs we should learn to turn the other cheek and continue helping them.


A few years ago I found myself homeless and destitute. This is where personal responsibility is a very good thing indeed. I blamed myself completely. (Which is only fair since it was a result of some very bad and selfish decisions on my part). Needless to say for a homeless male in his thirties there are no government programs to help. (there might be some actually I never took advantage off) Society threw me away. No family to pitch in either. Oh well I effed up my life. I became depressed and then mad (at myself.) And now a few years later I own a business that employees a dozen people. (Don't bother asking me to send a get rich quick tape. There is no secret. I just worked my ass off)

As a result of my years in the wilderness (sometimes literally) I got to know my fellow travelers quite well. What most of them lacked is a sense of personal responsibility. Everything bad that happened to them was someone else's fault. It was a conspiracy by god, their family , the army, the government , their ex-wife etc. Now a surprising number of homeless received government disability checks. They didn't get housing with the money because they wanted more cash for recreational drugs. Many others would get jobs for a day or two and then not show up cause it was boring or a pain.

So as a progressive I believe no-one should starve or live without a roof over their head. But I learned the hard way that some people do choose to be homeless. (There is no other word for it. Making conscious decisions to live the lifestyle they are comfortable with) And I am sure there are people that choose to live in chaos and poverty.

We need to help those that don't want to be poor. That wish to better themselves. We also need to realize that giving disability checks to addicts is cruel. That welfare should come with strings. (Such as norplant or a supportive group home environment) And that some people are self destructive no matter what we do. (Ask anyone who works with battered woman)

Without social responsibility we can not make this a better nation. Without personal responsibility those we try to help will not make it.

[earth mom]

58. Why does your post remind me of something I'd hear from a rethug?

:eyes:

[Kickoutthejams23]

59. Sometimes our experiences

don't fit neatly into our politics. Sad but true. A lack of personal responsibility by the way is hardly restricted to the poor and uneducated. FEMA Director Michael Brown had education and a good salary but is one of the most irresponsible MF's I have ever witnessed. Plenty of people have found themselves in a bad or tight spot and made there way out of it by fixing some things and choices in their lives. How this makes them repugs is beyond me.

[earth mom]

68. The reich wing is loaded with sociopaths like Brown and chimpy

who don't give a damn about anyone but themselves. They will never be held accountable for their actions. But if there is a god, someday they will be! :grr:

You sound like a rethug because you are being JUDGMENTAL instead of UNDERSTANDING. You are basing your opinion on yourself and what you were able to do. You did not take into consideration other peoples life experiences or abilities. Your homeless friends were not so lucky or educated enough to figure out how to get out of the situation they were living in and just gave the hell up. You escaped homelessness because maybe you had a better education or were just naturally smart enough to figure out how you could get from point A to point B. and make your life better. But that does not make you superior or better than the homeless or anyone else. If anything your experience should have given you insight to how people can fall so low and never escape. You should be feeling compassion for them instead of judging them. What's the saying...."There but for the grace of god go I"....

[Matariki]

69. This is just rude and dismissive.

so much for dissuasion, huh?

[Quantess]

104. What makes you think that?

His/her argument sounds pretty reasonable to me. Pretty moderate.

[Matariki]

70. Thanks for your post

On a personal level, NO ONE, rich or poor, changes their circumstances through self-pity or waiting for someone else to fix their problems. So the first step to improve one's life is to take responsibility for it. That can be extended to political action against the roots of injustice. This seems self evident and amazes me that it's often met with such resistance and anger.

Saying this in no way diminishes or denies the reality of social injustice or inequalities. These things exist concurrently.

[kcr]

76. Wow. That's really remarkable

I mean, wow, I am impressed. A homeless person was able to obtain enough capital to own their own business. I mean, that's incredible. A person with no access to showers or personal hygiene products or a mailing address walked into a bank and got a loan. Very, very impressive.

Or, a homeless person with no interview clothes, no access to showers or personal hygiene products and with no place to receive call backs got a job that lead to them owning their own business.

And we know that you had to do it in your rags because you said you worked your ass off, meaning that you got no help from anyone. Truly, you are an inspiration to us all.

[Kickoutthejams23]

78. First I got a job or two

Then I showed up everyday. After a couple of weeks I rented a room at a nudie bar (Tina's Angels on 30th ave and 34th st in St. Pete if anyone wants a cheap place to stay on vacation.) after a few more weeks I bought eyeglasses (I'm legally blind Also got some work boots cause I was doing roofing in the Florida summer and the roofing nails would go through my sneakers :nopity: ) Anyway a nice person rented me an used construction trailer for $400 a month (A nice drop from the weekly hotel rent)It took me two weeks to save up the deposit money to get electricity so I used candles for a while. (Never got the gas for the water heater the entire time I was there so it was cold showers for me.) I picked up a '67 Dodge Dart for $600 after a while and with the transportation was able to get a better day job (Instead of 6 dollar an hour day labor) Soon I was promoted at my new day job started making pretty good money and got my own apartment. People helped me out through all this (My first bed and dishes were gifts I had nothing but a garbage bag of clothes.) I don't want to downplay this it was not just me.

But I had to make that first step. I had to take responsibility for where I was and take personal responsibility to get myself out of it. It amazed me how much people will start to help you when they see you are trying to better your own life instead of blaming others or "circumstances" for it.

As for my own business well after spending a couple years working hard someone I met socially decided to open his own business. He hired me on as a 30% partner. He never knew me as a homeless person. Just as a dependable hard worker. We now have 12 employees and are making a go of it.

Yes I had advantages of that there is no question. And yes I was lucky and blessed to have good people enter my life.

It would have been so easy for me to blame others and decided my fate was sealed sitting in those woods. I know this because it's what I did for a while.... a long while. It was only when I placed the blame where it belonged was I able to help myself.

[kcr]

82. And you manage to get that job while homeless with no help!

Wow. That is just incredible that you used the Magic Power of Personal Responsibility to convince someone to give a homeless man who was dressed in filthy rags and stank and had no (because you must have, because you did all this through the Awesome Power of Your Magnificent Personal Responsibility and therefor could not have accepted help.) a job. Truly, your Personal Responsibility is an Awesome Personal Responsibility.

The sad part of this is that you admit you had help, and lots of it, and yet you still pretend that you Did It All By Yourself! And since you Did It All By Yourself, you seem to feel free to cast aspersions on other people, people you have never met and know nothing about.

I am not impressed.

[Kickoutthejams23]

86. Obviously you never worked day labor.

Or you would realize that everyone stank and wore rags. There are plenty of jobs down here for the disenfranchised they are hot and dangerous and pay 6 bucks an hour.

I never claimed to be Tony "effin" Robbins so where this magic power nonsense comes from I don't know. Yes people do help other people. I'm sorry my life hurts your worldview. Here is an idea. Take a week off from whatever you are doing and go down to Able Body or some other day labor camp at 5:30 am and work a week.

Yeah I talked about my fellow travelers at the homeless camp. Some are still there two work for me now and many are dead or have disappeared. I lived with these people I know some of them better than I know my family.

I helped Myself. Others helped me. Now I help others.

Why does the concept of either hard work or good deeds fill you with such bile. :wtf:

[kcr]

87. Wrong, mate

I have done day labor work, and the people who got hired did not stink and wear rags. Frankly, your list of jobs looks pathetic compared to mine -- I am intimately familiar with being so poor that I didn't know where my next meal was going to come from. The difference between you and me is that I don't pretend that no one helped me get to where I am now.

You claimed that your life was turned around by you and you alone. It wasn't until I called you on the obvious ridiculousness of that notion that you backtracked. You wrote a post meant to convince everyone that you bootstrapped your way up, and, by implication, to disparage the notion that society should help others. Except that it turns out that you didn't bootstrap your way to anything other than accepting the charity of others.

Your "worldview" isn't the problem -- your hypocrisy and attempts to deceive about the reality of your life is. A

[Kickoutthejams23]

96. If you live outdoors in Florida you stink.

Just a fact. Day Labor down here is limited to the truly destitute. The employment market is so tight that it's hard to hire anyone but the homeless (or people in government programs such as prison halfway houses) for under 10 bucks an hour. Again just a fact of life where I live.

I think society should help others. Yes I don't think drunks and drug addicts should get Social Security disability checks. I think it is kinda cruel. I think they need a supportive halfway house style living and a purpose and yes a job (even a stupid make-work job). Giving someone only money so they can slowly commit suicide seems inhumane to me. I saw too many good people kill themselves with heroin or alcohol paid for by Uncle Sam.

Look my post was to make a point not to be all autobiographical. It was on the topic of personal responsibility. I do feel that too many people of all walks in our society have a blame everyone but myself attitude. And yes that is often the reason they are in the fix they find themselves in. It is a weakness we all succumb to on occasion and has nothing to do with economic status.

Personal responsibility is not owned by the right (Is there anyone less responsible for his actions than shrub?)

But to blame everything on society solves nothing and does a disservice on those that need our help.

[liberaldemocrat7]

105. I loved the Dodge Dart I used to drive back in the 1960's.

I drove a white dodge dart in the 1960's and loved the car.


"Personal responsibility" appears some of the hypocritical jargon that Republiklan party members use like "states rights" and "Fiscal responsibility" or "getting government off our backs" to use as a lever to get their legislation passed and to win elections.

Republiklan party leaders have abandoned states rights when it no longer serves them, and have abandoned fiscal responsibility when it no longer served their purposes as also they did with getting government off our backs in order to allow fundies to "feel good" about persecuting people for electoral purposes.

I have a long list of Republiklan party leaders and members who killed people, cheated on their wives, embezzled money, molested teenaged women, blew up federal buildings and abortion clinics, etc and some of them have gone to jail, and some of them have gone to jail only for less than a year.

The REPUBLIKLAN Party does not appear the party of personal responsibilty, nor compassion and in my view NO REPUBLIKLAN Party member appears a christian. Most fiscal Republicans do not follow the teachings of Jesus but rather that of Ayn Rand and the fundies follow Tomas de Torquemada.


The REPUBLIKLAN Party counterfeits their image as a party of patriotic, America loving, religious, moral, compassionate people who appear strong on national defense.

Alot of people see that they failed to defend America on 9-11, do not really care for the poor, unmployed, disabled, etc but work hard to hide that fact, use religion to get votes of stupid people, use patriotism again to get votes of stupid people, say they love America but really love the money they get from their upper class jobs while they exploit people, and their compassion appears a false veneer like that of Elmer Gantry.

F the REPUBLIKLAN Party and the elephant they rode in on.

The party of Lincoln has turned into the party of George Lincoln Rockwell.

[The Sleeper]

33. False Fucking Construction.

This is one of those cheap, two bit right wing framing methods that they developed after years of focus groups and concerted effort. They deliberately mischaracterize their position behind feel good, "Real American Values", lingo, when their real goal is to create a permanent indentured underclass...i.e.....you. your children, your children's children. They want to bring back the good old days, alright...the good old days of the Dickensian workhouse....

The best way to play is to not take their bait, and to call them on their false constructions. To let them frame the terms of the debate means you start out behind the eight ball. After all, you don't think they really want an honest debate, do you ??

They only want mariginalize, ridicule, and discredit ANY other position excedpt their own, and will use any means necessary, fair or foul.....

[ComerPerro]

34. I will tell you this: People who celebrate "personal responsibility"

very rarely actually practice it themselves.

Usually its just self-promoting BS and lies that the speaker tells about himself to make himself feel better and to allow him to judge others.

No one is self-made.

[CollegeDUer]

35. I think the "left" believes in social responsibility creating personal res

Social responsibility creating personal responsibility: it's an idea that reaches far into the sciences of psychology and sociology. The left admits this fact more, but it's not really about left-right. It's about hard facts and science.

The fact that the right virtually ignores these sciences just shows that their leaders have callous disregard for truths that don't favor the hyper-rich and that their base is ignorant as anything.

[porphyrian]

37. Why must we choose one over the other?

Both are valuable and necessary. Each individual must be responsible for his or her own actions. Society must be responsible for all of its membership. The only disconnect is in the attempted framing of the right to make them mutually exclusive, which they aren't at all.

[BlooInBloo]

39. I think they *say* they do, but it *seems* like EVERYTHING is...

... SOMEBODY else's fault. From being fat to getting tickets for running red lights. It NEVER seems to be their own fault.

And that's really an admission of powerlessness on their parts: There's NOTHING they can do to make it better. So all they can do is just sit, be a victim, and cry.


EDIT: Maybe this is only a DU phenomenon, I don't know.

[Jed Dilligan]

40. "Personal responsibility" is a political trapdoor,

a rabbit-hole down which government responsibilities have been shoved.

I believe in my personal responsibility not to support politicians and corporations who damage the environment and systematically impoverish my fellow human beings.

[bleedingheart]

42. To be honest "Personal Responsibility" is an excuse

that people who could have helped use when they watch someone careen into a bad situation.

We have all done it.

I have a cousin who has been on and off welfare most of her life. At various stages the family watched as she was heading toward another disastrous marriage and as she got pregnant again and we would say..."oh my...when will she learn personal responsibility"...meanwhile all of us should have been helping her out either by mentoring her or by just having taken her to Planned Parenthood...

At one point one of my relatives lamented that she should have helped out our cousin's eldest child. At the time this other relative had a child the same age and she knew that my cousin's son was doing poorly in school...she wanted to have that child come over to her home so that he could hang out with family and perhaps get some extra help with homework...she didn't do it. She didn't "have the time"...and her son is graduating from a prestigious university in December...and our cousin's son is a high school dropout and has been employed off and on...

To be honest I think that in trying to "give people enough space" we sometimes are failing in terms of what we can do to help. My mother is my mentor. She raised two children by herself, having been widowed, and we were on the very bottom rung of the middle class...but she ran our household like a dictator and there were punishments doled out as well as warnings. And if she failed to give me a "lesson"...there was my eldest sister, aunt and various other relatives who would give you unwanted advice...most of which was for my own good.

In my cousin's case we all were being "too nice" and just watching as she failed and failed and failed...and you know what it would have probably helped if a number of us had stepped in and helped her...so while we can point fingers and lament her lack of personal responsibility...we should also point the finger back at ourselves and say..."but why did you just watch from the sidelines?"

[marions ghost]

71. so true

Often we abdicate responsibility while insisting that others should take 'personal responsibility.'

It can be a smokescreen for the righteous and self-centered.

[bleedingheart]

75. I had a friend who lived in a very large and expensive house

she would tell me about how she found those "welfare people with their foodstamps" to be an offense..and how it was wrong for them to spend their welfare money on "luxury items"...like a frozen pizza or Pepsi..

Meanwhile she was a paycheck away from losing all the luxuries she felt entitled too...and when her husband lost his job she was upset and didn't know what to do because they had no money saved..

The irony was not lost on me...a woman who never planned for her future or spent her money wisely felt that because she had more money than the welfare mother she had a right to judge how that woman spent her foodstamp money....

[marions ghost]

85. not often

do people get a 'message' from the cosmos so soon.:o If these rich people could have the experience of not knowing where their next meal was coming from for awhile, they might be considerably less righteous and judgmental.

I had a friend who got unemployment for awhile when he was between low-level teaching stints. His wealthy sister had married a banker and never worked a job in her life. She told him she didn't "want her tax dollars" going for him to be on unemployment. He needed to "take responsibility" y'know. Finally my friend got a permanent teaching job, but in the years since he has never had anything more to do with his sister or her family, referring to her only as "The Republican."

I remember once I went home from school with a friend whose family I knew was not all that well off, but I didn't have any real sense of that. My family didn't always have money for clothes and junk but we did at least have food. Anyway we got to this friend's house and she opened the fridge door and there was exactly one jar of mayonnaise and a carton of OJ. So without apology, this friend just gets a loaf of bread, spreads some mayo on it and makes "sandwiches" for us, chatting about school. I will never forget her nonchalance about that. She seemed glad that there was anything in the fridge at all.

Rich people who begrudge the poor money to eat...Marie Antoinette's spirit is alive and well...

[stillcool]

43. I don't know about 'believe in it'...but

there's now way to avoid it. The choices available to me have constricted my life, but responsiblity for those choices is mine. I am not however, responsible for the circumstances I was born into, the education I did not receive, or the ills of a society that values money over life.

[Finder]

46. Good topic. Hard to answer since the definition of "the left" seems open..

to personal interpretation these days or is defined by the "right" as a caricature.

A lot of good posts here with objective perspectives as well as personal experiences.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

49. The people who talk about "personal responsibility"

Usually aren't.

[ACStarsNStripes]

50. I have enough being passive

Just a quick reply, I am tired of being passive, first of all.
Second, I have decided that being passive is just another way
of surrendering, and I have learned by experience that I think
once the Republicans become passive once the Democrats start
winning, we should keep our eyes on them. Watching Good
Morning America clips on Yahoo! News, there are these small
Nazi-like groups are now trying to recruit young kids as young
as six or seven to follow the ways of Hitler and Nazi fascism
and our own free speech may be working against us to fuel them
too. Look up the words "Prussian Blues" and you will
get what I am saying.

[earth mom]

55. There's not a person on this planet who doesn't want to be personally

responsible. (except for sociopaths like chimpy!)

No one wants to live their life dependent on others! However as was pointed out upthread, the playing field is not level and many people have not the opportunity or chance or tools to make their lives better. The key component these people lack is EDUCATION. Far too many of the poor and underprivileged-get it: NOT PRIVILEGED!-in this country lack an education. And by that I mean they haven't gone past the 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th or 10th grade! Do we expect children that are in these grades who range in age from 11 to 15 to go out and support themselves...FOREVER?! HELL NO! Because that would be ridiculous and impossible! So why are we expecting those who are forever stunted in this way to make the right choices, or find work that is better than flipping burgers at McDonalds?! I'd bet money too that even if these people made it to 10th grade, they can barely read! The thugs who want to paint these people as users and takers would actually find that these people want to better their lives and take care of themselves but they DO NOT KNOW HOW TO! Just as any 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th or 10th grader would NOT!

What is there to not understand about LACK OF EDUCATION = DEAD END?! :grr:

[Matariki]

57. Question to those offended by the term 'personal responsibility'

and think the idea is just conservative code, 'wingnut' speech, etc.

Do you confine this opinion only to those living in poverty? If someone is wealthy and educated do they bear more responsibility in your eyes? Nothing happens in a vacuum. Can't we say that anything anyone does has mitigating factors? Do you apply this to, say, George Bush? Would anyone with horrid parents like his not be a terrible fuck up?

I once got in a very heated argument with a friend over this. In my home town, this guy broke into a woman's home and raped her at knife-point in front of her kids. Now my friend had gone to high school with this guy and argued vehemently with me that because the guy had grown up with abusive parents, who were poor and undereducated, that this guy was somehow not responsible for his actions. Sorry, I just can't accept that.

My sister was hit in a head on collision by someone who spun out because the tires on their car were bald. She was hurt badly and so was my niece. Now the person who hit her was well off, but "too busy" to replace his tires. Imagine instead that the person who hit her was a poor working mother, who just couldn't afford new tires, add to that lousy public transportation. Does this make her less responsible for nearly killing a woman and her two children than the person who was "too busy"?

To say these people had no choice over their actions is simply an apology for horrid and irresponsible actions.

I can't see this in black and white. All people have responsibility for their own actions - that's not "wingnut" talk. Just as everyone has circumstances and limitations that shape their choices. I see these stories illustrating the complexity of the issue, illustrating the fact that it's not an either/or thing. I won't let these people 'off the hook' just because they are poor or were victims themselves, yet I believe that this also provides very good examples of how society would benefit by taking care of people. If the minimum wage was a livable amount and/or public transportation wasn't a joke, perhaps the woman wouldn't have nearly killed my family. If there were social programs to identify and help kids in abusive homes, perhaps that guy wouldn't have been out raping women.

[Phx_Dem]

62. good points

I think most people do not understand the distinction between the nomothetic and ideographic methods/approaches.

At the ideographic level, people are responsible for their actions.

At the nomothetic level one can see how past events shape current behavior. That does not mean past events can be used as excuses, but that behavior can be better understood by looking at sociodemographic variables etc.

[Matariki]

65. ah, THOSE were the words I was looking for! Thanks!

;-)

[ProfessorGAC]

63. I Think You're Off The Beam Here

The words "personal responsibility" as used politically, have to do with HOW people live, not individual actions.

There is nobody here, in this thread, that suggests that environment is an excuse, perhaps a reason, but not an excuse, for criminal behavior or negligence.

These code words, as used by conservatives, are more reflective of an opinion that poor people are poor because of choices. People like me excuse the lady with a crummy education, an inability to work because of that and the choice to have a baby with a guy who turned out to be a slimeball that ran away when the going got tough.

Yes, she chose that man. She chose to have a baby, proabably too young. But, the environment in which she was raised nurtured no broader POV on which to make different decisions. But, she DID NOT choose that environment in which to be born. She DID NOT choose to be poor as a child. She DID NOT choose a bad school.

So, i think you're comparing apples to oranges. Criminal behavior is one thing. Being in a bad place in life, even though part of it is based upon personal choices, is a whole different thing. Republicans use these terms because they hate the idea of paying taxes to assure that such a woman is not made to live a miserable life forever, due to the circumstances of birth and environment.
The Professor

[Finder]

74. Excellent explanation. n/t

[Matariki]

90. I wholeheartedly disagree with you

Just because 'the right' uses that term solely to imply that poor people should get off public assistance, doesn't make it mean that. The examples I cited are just extreme examples of what I had in mind when I first posted.

The argument I had with my fried was over just that. He accused me of being 'rightwing' and 'privileged' because I insisted that the asshole who raped a woman in front of her kids was responsible for his actions. Or at least had to be held accountable. That the guy was the product of his upbringing I have no doubt. But not everyone who is abused as a child turns around to become an asshole. And yes, there are people here who will argue that some people have no choice over their actions because they are victims of something or other.

The woman driving with bald tires wasn't committing a crime. Between feeding your kids and getting new tires what would you pick? But if she gets in an accident and kills someone because she can't afford to maintain her car, who *is* responsible? If she dies and her kids are orphaned does lamenting that society is unjust to poor people change the fact? It's sort of like walking out into busy traffic while insisting that as a pedestrian you have the right of way. True as that might be, it's not going to help you one bit when you get your ass run over. That's what I mean by personal responsibility.

It isn't 'apples and oranges'. It has everything to do with the question.

[conflictgirl]

106. In the case of the car accident due to bald tires

Maybe instead of the choices being either "blame the poor person" or "blame society" we could be more solution-oriented and look at ways to change things, say by insisting on public transportation in all cities? Then the poor person who can't really afford the maintenance of a car but needs to drive to get to work because there's no public transportation in their town would actually have a viable alternative.

:think:

[Matariki]

108. Yes I absolutely agree

I think I said that. And still, in the here and now the person is being a danger to herself and others. Blame is irrelevant really if she kills herself or someone else. Do you see what I mean? If she had a head on collision with someone you love, and that person died, wouldn't you feel that the woman was acting irresponsibly? Even while seeing the need to improve public transportation and raise the minimum wage?

[ProfessorGAC]

112. Nope. Still Apples And Oranges

Either that, or you've missed the point of the whole rest of the discussion.

Nobody here is arguing that people aren't responsible for their own criminal or negligent actions.

Your whole position is rooted on that premise, and nobody here is suggesting that anyone get a pass if they commit a crime.

In fact, the whole point of the thread was to figure out what the left means by personal responsibility! And, you keep wandering back to the absolutism of the right wing. So, how they define it apparently DOES matter to you, despite your protestations. It has to, because you are seeing this black & white (despite your earlier statement).

And, you seem to be confusing "excuses" with "reasons". That woman with the bald tires has "reasons" for her decision. If she kills someone in an accident, circumstance don't excuse it. But, the reasons are no less valid.

Hence, i still think you're off the beam in this regard.
The Professor

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

81. When you started this thread...

were you unaware what a bullshit meaningless rightwing soundbite "personal responsibility" is?

Maybe you should be a little more responsible before posting.

[Matariki]

84. Wow, just wow.

We can't even discuss this topic among progressives without a lot of argument because there is NO consensus. Tagging anyone who doesn't agree with you a 'repug' or 'wingnut' or 'bullshit' doesn't really help the matter.

Reading through the thread, there are people who believe that 'personal responsibility' is a progressive ideal and there are people, like yourself, that believe it's a 'rightwing' concept that has no place here. Perhaps it's just semantics? What would you prefer to call the obligation you have to yourself to take care of yourself? I'm assuming you do that. Or do you expect others to take care of you? You, not some hypothetical person.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

113. Hmm.

So your excuse for not recognizing senseless rightwing talking points is that "other people do it too?"

Nope, doesn't sound very responsible to me.

[Matariki]

123. I think you're flame-baiting me

I noticed you avoided my question. Forget the term you seem so set on calling a rightwing talking point, and tell me if you value taking responsibility for your own actions? Do you take responsibility for how your actions effect those around you? And how is this *not* a progressive ideal?

or perhaps you're just interested in a flame war?

[athena]

110. What are you going to do about it?

In the end, this question is about policy. How are you going to hold people responsible? Do you believe in punishing people for being lazy and/or not making the best of their circumstances? Is dying of AIDS appropriate punishment for being a drug addict and sharing needles? (If so, it would follow that drug dealers should be executed.) I think that everyone deserves certain basic social services such as health care, unemployment insurance, and welfare.

We're not talking about criminal behavior here. The way I see it, the criminal justice system is about protecting people from harm, not about punishing them. The rapist should be put in jail so that he won't be able to hurt any more women. Regardless of whether the rapist is considered responsible for his actions, he should be locked up to protect society.

You seem to be saying that most liberals think no one is responsible for their actions. While a tiny minority may actually believe that, it is light-years from being the liberal stance. Conservatives believe the poor are poor because they're lazy. Liberals point out that it's not so simple as that, since not everyone starts with the same set of opportunities. How do you go from that to concluding that liberals don't believe in personal responsibility? It's a non-sequitur.

[warrens]

60. We believe in a solid safety net

For those who, for whatever reason, need help. That is far different from not believing in personal responsibility.

[TheFriedPiper]

61. Appeal to the selfishness of Republicans

I say things like

"sure, it is morally wrong for someone to get something for nothing, but when that person decides they are tired of having nothing and see that all avenues to getting something are being blocked, they will come in my house and TAKE MY shit! So, if I have to have a little of my pay go to keep that person from becoming desparate enough to take my shit, then I just look at it as the cost of living in a society that doesn't have hordes of desparate people taking other people's shit, sort of like buying insurance or installing a security system, except nicer"

Besides, it's not "Shaniqwa's" kids' fault that Shaniqwa is a lazy loser, so why should they be punished? (they always seem to claim that they can't get ahead because their taxes are high to support this fictional Shaniqwa person)

The funny thing is, they don't seem to mind their tax money supporting Halliburton and ADM.

I guess because the people running them aren't named Shaniqwa.

[ItNerd4life]

64. Individual freedom vs. individual responsibility

I think the left at times does hide from individual responsibility. Many solutions from the left involve 100% government control to solve the solution. Look at healthcare, many Democrats want 100% government control of healthcare. But why?

Consider how the Europeans handle education. They give the money to the people and then the people get to pick and choose the school they attend. Individual responsibility. It uses free marketplace and individual responsibility within the rules established by the government. Our system is 100% government control of education and is the reason why we are so far behind the rest of the industrialized world. (I believe we are ranked 27th? don't remember exactly)

I think the left believes very strongly in individual freedom of choice tied to social safety. Gay marriage and abortion are 2 freedoms that don't impact social safety. The right to bear arms impacts social safety and therefore is not considered acceptable by many Democrats

Now, this is DU and I should really focus on the problems with the right. I can't type that much. I'm getting dizzy just thinking about all the problems they have.

[BlooInBloo]

80. Wow. Nice string of republican talking points - impressive!

I, for one, don't know of any Democrats who believes the 2nd Amendment is unacceptable.

Care to name any? Or do you prefer to use the Faux News verbal tactic "many Democrats"?

Whatever makes you happy - you've made yourself perfectly clear, I think.

[ItNerd4life]

114. I'm confused, what are you talking about?

Many Democrats don't support the Republican interpretation of the 2nd ammendment. Are you saying you do? if so, that's fine, your choice.

In Chicago, Democrat mayor and council, handguns are illegal. Democrat reasons are they aren't good for social safety. Do you agree or disagree with this? What is your point?

[TheFriedPiper]

66. Hey, if you didnt want to be poor, you should have chosen better

parents.

[Lilith Velkor]

89. I met a guy who actually believes this.

:crazy:

[pitohui]

100. i have also lilith

claims he remember god coming to him before he was born and asking him!

who died and made him jesus?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

67. I don't believe in "personal responsibility" for parents.

It may or may not be possible to make a compelling case that if someone screws up then their life should be allowed completely to go to the dogs without the state interfering (I don't think that it is).

However, it clearly isn't possible to make any kind of case that children's lives should be ruined by their parents mistakes, and as such the state needs to provide a considerable "safety net" for parents, "personal responsibility" or no "personal responsibility", and it's clearly iniquitous not to do the same for the childless if you're doing that.

[AngryAmish]

72. I believe Bush is Hitler

[Retired AF Dem]

77. My highest measure of a person is a person

that takes responsibility for their actions good or bad. I was informed by an esteemed DUmember from NJ once that personal responsibility was a right wing concept. That statement still floors me.

[Matariki]

79. That's beginning to look like the consensus

Is it that most people can only see in black or white? I don't understand how people can see 'personal responsibility' & 'social responsibility' as mutually exclusive. The 'right' seems to believe so, in their rejection of social responsibility. I expected more from progressives though.

[ItNerd4life]

115. Democrats = Individual and social responsibility

I like the way you phrased that. That should be the Democrats mantra.

[Generator]

88. I've been thinking about this

due to the Katrina anniversary. I can see the position of the other side-if you get an education, get a decent job, you can afford to not be there when the disaster strikes. It is that simple in theory, BUT of course, that implies the playing field is equal for everyone. One thing I've always been aware of being in a family with those that have mental illness-is that taking any two people-basically equal-the same race, the same background still doesn't make it equal. The effort for one person to finish school, get a job, or merely get out of bed, take their medicine and face the world is not the same. For one person it's not THAT hard. For another, it's like climbing Mount Everest. So how can you measure all those things and say one person is a bum-and the other is a hero-because the measure of society is success-and basically it boils down to money. Some of those on the roofs in New Orleans probably were people I would trust and want to know much more than say, Donald Trump. They were "weaker", kinder, softer souls. They didn't have the get up and go and survival instinct that is SO valued in this society. How do you measure their race, their family, their individual character versus all the social factors?

Is it luck-you were born, poor and Black-but your luck is you had a father that gave you an education and a mother that loved you to death and supported you and didn't let you flounder and you used that luck and became a well made man? Or is it your individual greatness of character? How do you measure how hard it is for one person to do something?


But personal responsibility-de facto, yes. You have to save your own life and make your life the best you can. As a progressive, or Democrat or Leftie, or bleeding heart, whatever you call it-I say just because you are on that roof-even if you are a bum, and you spent your life drinking and never getting a job, your life is STILL valuable. Do you have a responsibility to make your life better and not expect the government to save you? Of course.

But I want the compassionate world. I don't want the one the Republicans want-which says if you are on that roof-and they and we don't really know the real reason because it's not as black and white as we want to make it-you deserve our help. It to me becomes a moot point. And beyond that, not just survival, but I want a a society that values it's own mental health. You cannot feel content in your own life if you must walk down the street and see others suffering to the degree that they are homeless,starving, dying of diseases. Are those people responsible? To the degree they can be. But, I, as part of society, am part of them, and thus I am responsible for THEM to the degree that I can be. And that makes my political bent so.

[Random_Australian]

91. Well, I say you have responsibility for what you can change, and not

for what was not really your fault.

Of course, this is overly simplistic, but in all honesty I don't have the time to do the full probability thingy.

Basically, there are mitigating circumstances but one is never entirely free from responsibility, and never taken to be completely in control of your circumstances. As an approximation, modify the responsibilty by the ratio of control over the situation.

[Nikki Stone 1]

93. Some responsibilities are personal, others are societal

The problem is when the two are confused or uncertain.

For example:

Deciding to use a condom to prevent pregnancy is personal responsibility. (The government can't make this decision for you)

Making sure that there is access to condoms at an affordable price is a societal responsibility. (The average individual has no power over this)

Making sure that teens know how to use condoms and other forms of birth control is something that liberals consider a societal responsibility but that conservatives consider a personal (familial) one. This is where a lot of the arguments start: in grey areas like this where people should take personal responsibility but if they don't (and many don't for a variety of reasons) then huge societal problems ensue. Liberals would rather prevent the large societal problems and conservatives would prefer to beat the drum of personal responsibility. In this case, a liberal would support sex education programs (and probably cover this information at home as well) and a conservative would try to get sex ed out of the schools (or replace it with abstinence programs) and maybe or maybe not cover this information at home. The liberal system seems invasive and values-ridden to the conservatives, and the conservative system seems like no system at all, a recipe for many failures, public health disasters, and "losers" among young people.

[Matariki]

94. really great post Nikki!

very clear examples.

[Nikki Stone 1]

98. Thank you. I believe in both personal and societal responsibility

I also believe in preventing social disasters. I think this is what makes me a liberal. I believe in paying for public services in health and education, for example, to prevent epidemics or illiteracy. I believe in paying for disaster relief, like FEMA, and having it being run by a public entity and not corporations out for themselves.

Someone has to care about the common good, and as a liberal, I believe that a representative government should do that.

[pitohui]

95. most everyone believes in personal responsibility

it is my observation that most people, left or right, have an exaggerated idea of what they can accomplish thru their own efforts -- and they have an even more exaggerated idea of what others can achieve thru their own efforts

by the time you're old, most people will find out if only the hard way that hard work and lots of effort didn't make them rich but by then it's too late, they've been voting GOP or otherwise against their own social/class interests for 40 yrs or more

it is hard to make people face reality w.out sounding rather depressing, since most wear rose-colored glasses and view life thru a blur of fantasy

sure, i believe in personal responsibility but i also believe in being realistic, telling people to take personal responsibility for being poor or sick or old is silly, hurtful, and a waste of time

most people, in reality, are peasants and they are always going to be peasants no matter how hard they try, i see how little my husband gets paid for doing hard important work to keep industry going, any blue collar family can say the same probably -- working hard and taking personal responsibility in the end means very little -- there is no honest or legal way up for us

look at how much personal responsibility paris hilton takes or how much george bush takes and yet they have untold wealth


the reality is that the most important things about you, your race, gender, health, your ability to learn and be educated, these things are beyond your control

personal responsibility can give you a little push upward but mostly we seize upon it because we are too frightened to acknowledge how much of life is out of our control

i can buy insurance to rebuild my house but i can't stop the tree from crushing my house in the first place -- i simply didn't and don't and never will have that power -- and the people around me (oh, hell, i did it myself) who over-reacted by then going crazy and cutting down all the other trees in sight, fine, we took responsibility, but did we improve our little bit of the world?

personal responsibility is something we cling to because we are afraid of how big the world is

[Matariki]

97. I don't understand why you equate responsibility with how much $$ you make

Why not equate it with what you contribute, whether to your community or those you care about? Why not equate it with caring for yourself? Or minding the sort of impact you're having on the environment? Why is it all about money, as if the person with the most money is somehow the most responsible? I don't get it. I think George Bush is a glaring example of someone who is lacking in personal responsibility. It doesn't matter how rich he is.

[pitohui]

102. without $$$ most people can't take responsibility, can they?

okay, ground rules here -- i am not ragging on you, but i am trying to explain clearly, i hope you can follow my logic

i am not talking about fantasy world, i am talking about real world, the one i was born into

i can be as nice and wonderful and terrific a person as i please but if society puts every block in my path to prevent me from earning $$$, it doesn't matter, because i go for 15 years w.out being to provide for my own health insurance or health care and i become magically "irresponsible"

in this society, we are required to produce those tickets called money to be allowed to purchase the right to survive

any discussion of responsibility and survival that is reality-based needs to take into account that we live in a capitalist society

what i contribute to my family and to my community has been adjudged to be worth practically nothing, the same for what my husband contributes, these days i often find myself wishing that all the refineries and the ports and the pipelines would shut down just for a year and the people who are too "responsible" to do the real work of the world -- let them see how well they do without the support of the blue collar worker and without "dirty" industry

we may wish society was otherwise but your worth in a capitalist society is your worth in dollars and cents

no more, no less

that is the way it is and i don't see the use of kidding myself about it

just yesterday i was chewed out on this site, in this GD forum, for taking in a katrina victim who had lost his home and told i was arrogant, you see, a working class person extending a hand of help to another person in trouble -- that is despised -- and not just by republicans, but really by most people

in the world of "personal responsibility" the guy who lost his house should have just sucked it up and slept in his car for six months

i feel i am being put in an unfair double bind

do anything to help myself or another, and i'm some sort of elitist apparently, but in situations where i can't do anything useful, suddenly i'm irresponsible

i'm getting hit by both sides

but seriously you do know in your heart that it is much easier to be "responsible" and make ideal choices if you have money, the rich man never has to decide between glasses for his child or a set of tires on the car, he can buy whatever he needs to be "responsible" and look pretty in the face of the world

[Matariki]

107. I guess it depends on how you define responsibility

I personally don't define it by an ability to pay bills on time. I define it by choices that are going to have the most positive impact for both myself and the world. I think, for instance, that people who take the bus are acting more responsibly than people who drive. In that instance it's statistically probable that poor people are acting more responsible than rich people. Or using condoms. Or taking the time to recycle your trash. And so forth.

[conflictgirl]

111. I think that's a suitably nuanced view of things

I don't tend to think many issues are black and white, and the personal responsibility issue is one of them. How can we quantify who is exhibiting more personal responsibility - the wealthy person who needs no public assistance, but wastefully overconsumes resources (not saying all wealthy people do, just that they are more likely to have the money to do so) or the person who needs public assistance but rides the bus and recycles regularly? The wealthy but overweight person, or the poor but thin person? The person who has too many kids because they don't have access to birth control or abortion, or the person who has too many kids just because they want kids and can afford them (therefore making a more irresponsible choice in terms of overpopulation)?

I would definitely agree that NOT taking personal responsibility is deeply ingrained in our culture, at all income levels. Our culture promotes it. And to an extent, I believe it's human nature, though we can look at other periods in our own history and in other cultures where personal responsibility was expected and people had more mastery over their own impulses.

In any of my posts on this subject, I don't mean to sound like I'm supporting the idea of making excuses. I just think that almost everyone is guilty of a lack of personal responsibility in *some* area of their lives, but some people's irresponsibility draws more criticism than others' does.

[conflictgirl]

103. Not pitohui, but I have a theory

"Personal responsibility" is almost never directed at rich people. The personal responsibility argument is almost always directed at poor people who need help and who may not have the resources to easily change their circumstances.

Really, when was the last time you heard a discussion among people of mixed political persuasions in which they were referring to wealthy people needing to have more personal responsibility? Why isn't the tax cut issue framed by "personal responsibility," for example? After all, don't we each have a personal responsibility to follow the rules of society and contribute what we're supposed to?

I am willing to bet that the vast majority of arguments saying that people need to have more personal responsibility are directed at the poor. I could find many, many examples in which the wealthy try to evade personal responsibility. However, in our society it is not the corporate welfare or the breaks for the rich that make us feel like we're being robbed, it's that single mom getting that lavish $700/month check (or less) for two years.

Pretty screwed up, if you ask me.

[athena]

101. Do you believe "irresponsible" people deserve health care?

Liberals believe that every human being deserves a few basic services such as health care and education. No one should have to die from AIDS or pneumonia just because they made some bad choices in life. No one should end up on the street just because their job has been shipped to India. Sometimes people just need a little help to get going, and that's what welfare and unemployment insurance are for.

The right-wing forgets that a big part of the equation is luck. Do CEO's work 500 times harder than their average employee to get paid 500 times the average salary? Is a single mother who works two minimum-wage jobs just to make ends meet really less "responsible" than an oil tycoon? Does the son of a successful businessman really deserve to inherit the company? One can look at the taxes rich people pay as a way of paying for their good luck.

No one is saying that hard work shouldn't be rewarded. Most leftists are not for communism. We just want a society where every human being is treated with dignity.

[Nikki Stone 1]

109. Society deserves that "irresponsible" people get health care

I would rather pay for vaccinations than have a TB epidemic

I would rather pay for birth control and sex education than have a nation of unwanted children born to teen parents who can't raise them

I would rather pay for hospital emergency services rather than have sick people who are too "irresponsible" or too poor to get health care spreading disease.

Public health affects EVERYONE. Another person's health decisions can affect the health of the whole society. In paying for decent health care, we are paying for good public health which benefits everyone.

[Cleita]

120. That's the truth and I was watching some

show yesterday on TV where doctors believe that if we don't start addressing public health worldwide that we may have a revisiting of the plagues of the Middle Ages because they have discovered some new mutations that don't respond to our conventional medicine. The thing with plague is that it's an equal opportunity offender. It will strike the rich equally along with the poor. As long as we have homeless and poor, we will have people living in squalid conditions that are ripe for spreading plague like illnesses that are hard to stop and cure once started.

[Nikki Stone 1]

124. This is scary as hell, a great example of why we need good public health

regardless of personal responsibility. We cannot leave prevention of plagues in the hands of individuals.

[Cleita]

119. Well, said. My thoughts exactly.

:thumbsup:

[lukasahero]

117. I believe fiercely in my *own personal* responsibility

I, as a liberal, also believe fiercely that there are people in this world who haven't been afforded the opportunities in life that I have.

I believe fiercely in helping those with less opportunity either through direct investment of my time and money or indirect involvement in the form of voting for the branch of government that believes in its own responsibility to help, serve and protect.

In other words, I guess to me being a liberal has always meant helping people, not judging them.

[Cleita]

118. I agree with you Kineta.

My two cents is that we as a society have a duty to help who can't take care of themselves, the children, the elderly and the disabled and dysfunctional adults among us. This is why we need universal health care and meaningful welfare. When a family falls on hard times, they should be able to get some form of welfare for their children and for themselves until they can rejoin the mainstream.

Working class people who have lost jobs and can't meet payments and mortgages should be able to get low interest loans from the government to tide them over until they go back to work again, which then they will pay it back at maybe 10% of the salary until paid off.
This should shut up the conservatives who think people collect welfare because they are lazy.

There should be no homeless, no children living in unsanitary and haphazard conditions, no mentally ill untreated in our society if we were truly a nation of greatness that many claim we are.

[Name removed]

121. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Matariki]

122. insulated due to affluence?

not sure i quite understand.