Do you know one? Perchance your mother, father, brother, or sister is a person you would characterize as lovingly protective. He or she maybe an individual who works to shield loved ones from harm. This fine fellow or femme plots and plans in an attempt to prevent any crisis. People come to depend on caring souls such as he or she. Indeed, you may be the cautious crier who actively expresses concern for the health and welfare of those you treasure. It is a tough task, but you, or someone in your life may have assumed responsibility for the well-being of another. Surely, someone must keep us safe and sane. One never knows who might lurk or linger in the halls, bathroom stalls, on a plane, boat or train. Credentials must be checked. If family and friends cannot safeguard us from the crazies and fanatics certainly, our sweet Uncle Sam will.
Article II of the Constitution and the American people provide the Commander-In-Chief the authority to protect and defend at all costs, or currently, it would seem so. Checks and balance be damned, when the consensus within the country is, “We are at war!”
In a time such as this, few reflect upon the parallels in their everyday lives. Quietly, each of us recalls when we, personally, were at war. The conflict was covert. Rarely were we even conscious of what occurred. Thus, just as we are as children, in adulthood, we oblige. When asked to remove our shoes in an airport, American citizens, and visitors to this country, do so. “Put your sweater in the tray.” Happy, with the prospect that we might avoid a full body search, we smile, and act in accordance with the command.
This is after we handed the Transportation Security Administrators our boarding pass and photograph identification card. Indeed, as we shuffle off to Buffalo, New York, Billings, Montana, or Bakersfield, California, we succumb to the many demands put before us. The public is now, for the most part, willing to submit to a body scan. Seventy-eight percent of the Americans polled support the use of technology that in the past, would have been considered a physical invasion of privacy.
Although fifty-one percent of the American people who were asked favor racial and ethnic profiling, this action, in truth, is thought politically incorrect. Nonetheless, archetypal classifications are “acceptable” to more than half the populace. People prefer to feel protected. Most trust they will never be subject to unwarranted seizure. Nor will the use of these X-rays affect their health. Certainly, Uncle Sam is scrupulous and will not use the images in an unethical manner. Others are the adversaries. Authority figures are as Mom and Dad. They do as they do in our best interest.
As humans, we long for love, and interpret protective practice as an expression of this caring, or do we? Might we muse Americans have become inured to the fragility factor. Constantly, especially in this decade, citizens have been told there is reason to fear. Hence, Americans have become extremely apprehensive. Paradoxically, the Office of Homeland Security concludes that much of our trepidation is of our own making.
It begins in childhood. In the last score or so, fearful parents proclaimed, “Do not talk to strangers.” The neighborhood is on watch. Playtime must be supervised. “The world,” Moms and Dads declare, “is not a safe place.” Indeed, it is impossible to escape the hazards. Scary people are everywhere. Nonetheless, mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters, aunts and of course Uncle Sam will help. Rest assured; “we are doing everything in our power to keep you and your family safe and secure.”
Children were, perchance, comforted. Today, mothers and fathers ponder their growing pains. Many reason it is better to cloister a little one. Thus, parents plan every activity. From birth forward, it is more than 18 Years in the Making. Cash is stashed for college. Schools and careers are chosen and charted before a child takes his or her first steps. Tikes are trained and tested to ensure that they will achieve. Once the standards are set, early in life, our government takes over. Officials watch our every move and we are comfortable with this.
Americans, compassionately teach their children to be on guard However, as an adolescent medicine specialist at Montefiore Medical Center in New York City, Doctor Elizabeth Alderman observes, overprotective parents have left their children with few real-world coping competencies. ”If you don’t have these skills, then it’s very normal to become anxious.”
Diane knows this well. She learned her lessons long before the current trend in parenting. Darling Diane was but a lass when she discovered that she was not safe. Decades ago, years before people hid behind locked doors and windows, Diane realized that everywhere she went there was danger.
In the 1950s the little tike understood, when she walked to school, she did not travel alone. Her mother marched with her. Mrs McMahon did not stroll at the young girl’s side. Nor did the elder woman sweetly saunter just out of sight. Madame McMahon hung over Diane’s head. She haunted her darling daughter, and was always in the youngster’s thoughts.
For Diane, it was as it is today for a young patient of Doctor David Anderegg, a Child Psychologist in Lenox, Massachusetts. As the adolescent spoke with the Professor of Psychology at Bennington College, she said “I wish my parents had some hobby other than me.” Experts appear to agree; being the subject of intense scrutiny can cause a child, of any age, to be anxious.
Diane McMahon concurs. Whatever she did, Diane could not shake the angst. Her protective parent influenced her every action; however, not in ways that would benefit the girl or her relationship with her Mom.
If Diane thought to be with peers, Mom was always in the background of her mind. When her friends stole makeup from Walgreen’s Pharmacy, Diane did too. The “culprit” knew she could not keep the cosmetics, at least not at home. She arranged for a friend of hers, whose Mom and Dad did not go through her drawers, to take the foundation, powder, eye shadow, and mascara. Each evening these, along with the lipstick and perfume would go home with an acquaintance. In the morning, on the way to school, all would be returned to Diane.
When classmates said smoking is cool, Diane tried it. Warnings from her mother, while heard, and alive, loudly in Diane’s head, did not persuade the teen to do what Mom wanted her to do.
She never openly crossed her mother; nor did the girl question Mrs McMahon’s wisdom. Diane merely hid her heart, the stolen makeup, the cigarettes, and her life. The mother lived blissfully, ignorant of who her daughter was, and what she did daily. The two had a good relationship, and seemingly, to this day they do. However, the hurts, just as the haunts, remain unseen.
In Diane’s family secrets prevail. Just as a rebellious child, a sibling, a spouse, or a terrorist, people do what they desire to do. No one, not even a firm Mrs McMahon, Mister Obama, Mister Bush, you, or I can control what will come. Indeed, we create it.
When people are presumed to be in need of protection, ultimately, they guard themselves from the protector. Those alleged guilty persons, often prove not to be as they appear to be. Diane enjoyed her hours at home with her parents. She cherished the time they spent together away as well. Yet, there was always unexpressed tension.
Hothouse parenting undermines children in other ways, too, says Anderegg. Being examined all the time makes children extremely self-conscious. As a result they get less communicative; scrutiny teaches them to bury their real feelings deeply. And most of all, self-consciousness removes the safety to be experimental and playful. “If every drawing is going to end up on your parents’ refrigerator, you’re not free to fool around, to goof up or make mistakes,” says Anderegg.
Parental hovering is why so many teenagers are so ironic, he notes. It’s a kind of detachment, “a way of hiding in plain sight. They just don’t want to be exposed to any more scrutiny.”
Infinite inspections, eternal examinations, possible detection did not necessarily stop Diane from engaging in the behaviors her mother feared. Nor would a prohibition or possible penalty inhibit the lass . Threats have no power. As a toddler Dine realized the notion Scott Stewart, Vice President of Tactical Intelligence at the global foundation, Stratfor acknowledges. The security expert advises; regardless of what type of technology is used at airports, or which techniques are employed by “protective parents, creative terrorists, just as tots, teens, and those at any age, will always find ways to get around it.
When asked if airport body scanners can stop terrorist attacks, he said, “Look at prison systems, where searches are far more invasive – they still can’t stop contraband from being smuggled into the system,” Mister Stewart continues and cautions. Americans tend to rely on technology, “instead of human intelligence,”
We might extrapolate. Protective parents depend upon their ability to provide safety and security. Rather than teach self-reliance, nervous caregivers coddle, cosset, and lavish “love” on their little ones. Mothers and fathers create a culture cocooned from harm and believe this is good parenting.
John Portmann, Professor of Religious Studies at the University of Virginia has observed, many students, such as Diane, “There is a ritual every university administrator has come to fear.” He explains. “Every fall, parents drop off their well-groomed freshmen and within two or three days many have consumed a dangerous amount of alcohol and placed themselves in harm’s way. These kids have been controlled for so long, they just go crazy.”
Professor Portmann feels the effects of overprotection are even more pernicious. He suggests the whole fabric of society is feeble and fallible when we place our faith in our mother, father, or the Federal government. Portmann is very familiar with what he sees each semester. Young people and their parents become weaker, “more responsive to the herd, too eager to fit in-less assertive . . , unwilling to disagree with their peers, afraid to question authority, more willing to conform to the expectations of those on the next rung of power above them.”
That is, perhaps, the greater threat to the persons who reside on this planet. Most forfeit their personal power. People presuppose someone will know what is best. We trust the crowd or the Commander-In-chief. Most think as the group does. “Evil is everywhere.” “There are enemies all about.” “Terrorists want to kill us.” These are considered conventional wisdoms or accepted assumptions. However, the paradox is, presumptions become projections. Self-fulfilling prophecies survive. Frequently, these conjectures thrive, while, just as in all other wars, citizens die.
In counterterrorism circles, the standard response to questions about the possibility of future attacks is the terse one-liner: “Not if, but when.” This mantra supposedly conveys a realistic approach to the problem, but, as Joseba Zulaika argues in Terrorism, it functions as a self-fulfilling prophecy. By distorting reality to fit their own worldview, the architects of the War on Terror prompt the behavior they seek to prevent-a twisted logic that has already played out horrifically in Iraq. In short, Zulaika contends, counterterrorism has become pivotal in promoting terrorism.
Diane, her deeds, Mrs McMahon sense of doom, and the destructive practice of a protective philosophy affirm what scores of Americans dismiss in the abstract. What we fear most has power. As is oft-stated, what we conceive, and truly believe, will be achieved. Ample research asserts, whether what we imagine is for good or the source of our grief, our conviction can be a cause and an effect. Often we are too close to a situation to see what others easily discern.
To the countless who contemplate traumas such as terrorism and ask, “What next?” There are many possible prospects. We can choose to cultivate a culture that cares rather than works to control or we can continue to rely on a reality that has never been. Americans can have faith that the Commander-In-Chief “Will Do Everything” or we can accept that, alas, the demon is our own dependency.
References for the reality of resentment, revolt, or insurgent rebels . . .
He was a beautiful bouncing baby boy. He was born to two parents that love him dearly. Even before his birth, indeed, prior to conception, this little fellow was the apple of his parent’s eyes. His biological beginning was carefully calculated. As the seeds of life developed into a bright-eyed baby, the people he now knows as Mom and Dad thought of little else but Maxwell. The soon to be proud Papa and Momma anxiously anticipated the day they could hold this bundle of joy. Each of his parents was eager to meet and greet the small, sweet face of the guy that they would call Max. Maximum value, supreme significance, marvelously magnificent, all this was and would be their son. After Max was delivered and during any political season, such as this, Mom and Dad feel certain Max is issue number one.
The guardians look over their angel. They plan for his future, and they are apprehensive, just as their parents and grandparents were before them. For generations the realities of daily life have shaped parental priorities. First and foremost, families want to survive, to feel safe and secure. Yet, much that accounts for stability is beyond the control of a parent or any single person. Moms and Dads agonize, as do all individuals. Economic, educational, environmental concerns have an effect on caregivers and all citizens. Military engagements also affect households, even if only one lives within the domicile. Mothers, fathers, and babies, boys or girls learn to fear.
Ultimately, in the course of a life, each individual will ask, how does any matter affect me, my family, and friends of mine? Countless citizens sense we have loss the sense that within a society, each individual works for the commonweal. The words of Thomas Paine On the Origin and Design of Government in General are principles from the past. In America today, the common folk feel they can no longer trust the government. In recent years, people profess too many promises were broken; lies were told. Intelligence was not wise. Still, Americans sense there is an enemy.
In the minds of most Americans, the foe exists outside self. Few have fully internalized the truth of the words uttered by Franklin Delano Roosevelt, “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.” As people do, citizens in this country trust themselves. People know their faith will guide them. The Almighty will not disappoint them. Proud of their personal strength and all they survived throughout the course of their lives, the American public, no matter their economic station believes their family will be fine. All Americans trust in their ability to fight the opposition. Residents in the United States are not afraid to take up arms if they need to protect themselves from evil forces.
Nevertheless, Americans are “bitter.” People in the cities, the suburbs, and in the countryside, resent the precarious position their leaders have placed them in. In the “Land of the free and home of the brave” the public is “looking for strong leadership from Washington.” Individuals and communities recognize they cannot go it alone. Sadly, those previously entrusted with Executive privileges have not served the common folk within the United States well. Citizens have expressed their ample concern for quite a while and no one seems to hear the cries. While some of the Presidential aspirants wish to believe Americans are not indignant . . .
(New York) – More than 80 percent of Americans believe the country is headed in the wrong direction, the highest such number since the early 1990s, according to a new survey.
The CBS News-New York Times poll released Thursday showed 81 percent of respondents said they believed “things have pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track.” That was up from 69 percent a year ago, and 35 percent in early 2002.
The survey comes as housing turmoil has rocked Wall Street amid an economic downturn. The economy has surpassed the war in Iraq as the dominating issue of the U.S. presidential race, and there is now nearly a national consensus that the United States faces significant problems, the poll found.
A majority of Democrats and Republicans, men and women, residents of cities and rural areas, college graduates and those who finished only high school say the United States is headed in the wrong direction, according to the survey, which was published on The New York Times’ Web site.
Seventy-eight percent of respondents said the country was worse off than five years ago; just 4 percent said it was doing better . . .
The poll also found that Americans blame government officials for the housing crisis more than banks or homebuyers and other borrowers. Forty percent of respondents said regulators were mostly to blame, while 28 percent named lenders and 14 percent named borrowers.
Americans favored help for people but not for financial institutions in assessing possible responses to the mortgage crisis. A clear majority said they did not want the government to lend a hand to banks, even if the measures would help limit the depth of a recession.
Intellectually astute, each individual understands to his or her core, a country must work well as a whole. If we act independently of others, with little regard for those who reside in our nation, we all will realize a reason to feel insecure. No family can survive alone. Maxwell’s parents can plan and work to provide, but if the country suffers from a crisis, be it fiscal, a protracted feud, the cost of food, or fuel, the family will also find themselves in situation critical.
In a society, we are our neighbors’ keeper, for what affects those in adjacent abodes will influence us. If one person is poor, so too is his brother.
The tenet is true in the abstract; it is also viable concretely. We need only consider what occurs when one domicile on the block is in disrepair or foreclosure flourishes in an enclave. Property values for all homes in the area plummet. A family functions best as a unit. A nation fares well when we are one.
Our most conservative estimates indicate that each conventional foreclosure within an eighth of a mile (essentially a city block) of a single-family home results in a 0.9 percent decline in value. Cumulatively, this means that, for the entire city of Chicago, the 3,750 foreclosures in 1997 and 1998 are estimated to reduce nearby property values by more than $598 million, for an average cumulative single-family property value effect of $159,000 per foreclosure. This does not include effects on the values of condominiums, larger multifamily rental properties, and commercial buildings.
Less conservative estimates suggest that each conventional foreclosure within an eighth of a mile of a property results in a 1.136 percent decline in that property’s value and that each foreclosure from one-eighth to one-quarter mile away results in a 0.325 percent decline in value. This less conservative finding corresponds to a city-wide loss in single-family property values of just over $1.39 billion. This corresponds to an average cumulative property value effect of more than $371,000 per foreclosure
In 2008, this consideration consumes millions of persons who thought they were safe and secure. As the subprime debacle ripples through every community, people realize their very survival is at risk. Everyone, even some of the elite now experience a profound sense of insecurity. Again, people ask who or what might they trust. The average American has faith only in what is familiar. Max, Mom, and Dad, families turn to what is tried and true. Whatever has protected them in the past, they hope, will save them from what is an uncertain future.
Certainly, people have no confidence in government. Many are frustrated. They resent those who placed them in such a precarious situation. Mothers, fathers, sons such as Max, and daughters are reminded, without regulations only the few profit. Dreams die. Witness the subprime debacle.
Mortgage companies and banks, such as Wells Fargo, have twisted the average prime mortgage loan into something much more incapable of paying by the recipient, but profitable to the company. Subprime loans, as “adjustable rate mortgages,” are packed with deceiving modifications that have low “teaser” rates that expand in interest exponentially after an initial low pay period. Families that have received Subprime loans have bit into a bitter center of the sugar-coated American dream.
Citizens in this once prosperous country wonder whether they will ever again be able to trust that they can aspire to greater heights. Homes are no longer worth what they were at the time of purchase. Payments on adjusted rate mortgages [ARM] are exorbitant and balloon expenditures are now due. Americans feel pinched. Businesses are also affected by a slowed economy and bad investments. Bankruptcy is an option, although brutal. As the cost of fuel and food rises, financial fears become more real. Existence takes a toll. As Americans assess the circumstances within their home region, they realize there is reason to hold on tightly to what they know and love.
Perchance G-d and country are all citizens can believe in, and maybe there is no longer reason to believe either of these will save them. Certainly, Administrations in the recent past and present have not protected us well. After all, our Presidents, Congress, and the Federal Reserve were responsible for the Demise of Glass-Steagall Act. This law once regulated banks and limited the conflicts of interest created when commercial depositories were permitted to underwrite stocks or bonds. Without such oversight, Americans lost their security. Survival no longer seems possible. The American Dream is a nightmare.
Strange days are upon the residents of many a suburban cul-de-sac. Once-tidy yards have become overgrown, as the houses, they front have gone vacant. Signs of physical and social disorder are spreading.
At Windy Ridge, a recently built starter-home development seven miles northwest of Charlotte, North Carolina, 81 of the community’s 132 small, vinyl-sided houses were in foreclosure as of late last year. Vandals have kicked in doors and stripped the copper wire from vacant houses; drug users and homeless people have furtively moved in. In December, after a stray bullet blasted through her son’s bedroom and into her own, Laurie Talbot, who’d moved to Windy Ridge from New York in 2005, told The Charlotte Observer, “I thought I’d bought a home in Pleasantville. I never imagined in my wildest dreams that stuff like this would happen.”
In the Franklin Reserve neighborhood of Elk Grove, California, south of Sacramento, the houses are nicer than those at Windy Ridge-many once sold for well over $500,000-but the phenomenon is the same. At the height of the boom, 10,000 new homes were built there in just four years. Now many are empty; renters of dubious character occupy others. Graffiti, broken windows, and other markers of decay have multiplied. Susan McDonald, president of the local residents’ association and an executive at a local bank, told the Associated Press, “There’s been gang activity. Things have really been changing, the last few years.”
In the first half of last year, residential burglaries rose by 35 percent and robberies by 58 percent in suburban Lee County, Florida, where one in four houses stands empty. Charlotte’s crime rates have stayed flat overall in recent years-but from 2003 to 2006, in the 10 suburbs of the city that have experienced the highest foreclosure rates, crime rose 33 percent. Civic organizations in some suburbs have begun to mow the lawns around empty houses to keep up the appearance of stability. Police departments are mapping foreclosures in an effort to identify emerging criminal hot spots.
The decline of places like Windy Ridge and Franklin Reserve is usually attributed to the subprime-mortgage crisis, with its wave of foreclosures. And the crisis has indeed catalyzed or intensified social problems in many communities. But the story of vacant suburban homes and declining suburban neighborhoods did not begin with the crisis, and will not end with it. A structural change is under way in the housing market-a major shift in the way many Americans want to live and work. It has shaped the current downturn, steering some of the worst problems away from the cities and toward the suburban fringes. And its effects will be felt more strongly, and more broadly, as the years pass. Its ultimate impact on the suburbs, and the cities, will be profound.
Perchance, more weighty than the influence of a social degradation on a community is the impression such dire circumstances leave on a little lad such as Maxwell. Young Max will learn, just as his parents had. Likely, he too will come to believe that he can only depend on himself. An older and wiser Max will not fully grasp how extraordinary he is, or perhaps he will know all to well that no matter how glorious he is, someone might jeopardize his stability. No matter how well he lives his life, another force, power, person, or authority might cause his dreams to go awry.
Maxwell sees how hard life is for his parents. He comes to understand that he too will always and forever, need to prove his worth. How else might he hold onto his job, his home, his money, or his sense of self? For Maxwell, as for us, anyone, innocent as they may be, might seem a threat. His Mom and Dad, fearful that they might lose their livelihood, health care benefits, the family home, and their ability to provide, let alone survive, teach their young son trepidation.
Mom and Dad look around the neighborhood and they see society is shifting. People of other races, colors, and creeds are destined to overtake the white majority. This can be nothing but trouble, or so they think. Maxwell trusts this sentiment to be true. The parents wonder; might immigration and Free Trade deprive them of their life style? In the United States, Anglo Americans react more to what they muse might be so. However, ample evidence affirms the contrary. A 2006 study, by the Pew Hispanic Center avows, the sudden rise in the foreign-born population does not negatively effect the employment of native-born workers.
By Rakesh Kochhar, Associate Director for Research
Pew Hispanic Center
August 10, 2006
Rapid increases in the foreign-born population at the state level are not associated with negative effects on the employment of native-born workers, according to a study by the Pew Hispanic Center that examines data during the boom years of the 1990s and the downturn and recovery since 2000.
An analysis of the relationship between growth in the foreign-born population and the employment outcomes of native-born workers revealed wide variations across the 50 states and the District of Columbia. No consistent pattern emerges to show that native-born workers suffered or benefited from increased numbers of foreign-born workers . . .
The size of the foreign-born workforce is also unrelated to the employment prospects for native-born workers. The relative youth and low levels of education among foreign workers also appear to have no bearing on the employment outcomes of native-born workers of similar schooling and age.
Nevertheless, people continue to fear what is less than familiar. Maxwell’s mother and father often speak of the immigrants. The words voiced are unkind. Assessments often are unrealistic. In this country, on this globe, our apprehensions, our insecurity, the fear that we might not survive divides us. Self-surety is issue number one.
When individuals do not feel as though all is fine, when distressed, emotional reactions may be exaggerated. Many persons prefer to deny that they feel distraught. The press, the powerful, and persons who wish to be more prominent understand this. Each is expert in the art of persuasion. Tell us that we are doing well, that we are strong, that they will help bring certainty, security, and safety to our lives, and to our country, and we will croon along with them.
Anxious Americans, at home and abroad, such as the parents of young Maxwell attack. Anyone can be considered the enemy. Bankers, big business, bureaucrats, billionaire oil magnates, migrants, and of course, mutineers of Middle Eastern descent. Our fellow citizens are easily terrorized, if not by the persons who they think might destroy the neighborhood, or take their job, the people who crashed a plane into the Twin Towers must be a target. Since September 11, 2001, Maxwell parents have thought it wise to protect United States shores.
Some Americans say we must stay the course in Iraq and Afghanistan. These persons may fear terrorists from the Persian Gulf. There is great consternation when people do not think they are physically safe.
Citizens feel a greater concern when they discover the reasons we went to war are invalid. Again, the people in this country recognize the adversary is the American Administration. Lie by lie, the Iraq War Timeline reveals greater reason for antipathy.
Those who cite security and survival as the primary concern proclaim, “It is the economy.” They say, this is the number one issue Americans must address. Too many persons, today, cannot even live paycheck to paycheck. Disposable income, discretionary spending, savings to fall back on are luxuries of the past. People dream of the cushion they hope to create. Yet, in the back of their minds, they fear. Again, foreclosures are in the forefront in people’s minds. Many are mired in debt. In February 2008, another sixty percent (60%) of Americans concluded they could no longer pay the mortgage. Mortgage Woes Boost Credit Card Debt. Balances on charge cards cannot be reconciled.
Americans are struggling with a very rocky economy while they are also holding almost $1 trillion in credit card debt. In most cases, those cards provide a little flexibility with the monthly bills. But an increasing number of people are defaulting because of the “tricks and traps” – soaring interest rates and hidden fees – in the credit card business.
Before more Americans get in so deep that they cannot dig out, Washington needs to change the way these companies do business to ensure that consumers are treated fairly.
The stories about deceptive practices are harrowing. At a recent news briefing in Washington, a Chicago man told about what happened when he charged a $12,000 home repair bill in 2000 on a card with an introductory interest rate of 4.25 percent. Despite his steady, on-time payments, the rate is now nearly 25 percent. And despite paying at least $15,360, he said that he had only paid off about $800 of his original debt.
Once more Americans are confronted with what causes great bitterness. No one, not Congress, the companies that lend citizens cash, the corporate tycoons, or candidates can imagine why Americans might be bitter. None of these entities care enough to help the average Joe, Jane, Maxwell, or his parents.
Why might inhabitants in this Northern continent be cynical, or feel a need to cling to religion, weapons, or hostility. Perhaps, these sanctuaries feel more tangible. Faith, as an arsenal, and anger too, are at least more affordable than other options.
Petroleum prices are also an issue of import. Citizens cry, I now work for fuel. Only four short month ago, oil hit $100 a barrel for the first time ever. The rate charged for petroleum continues to climb. Now the expense exceeds what was once unimaginable. The cost of crude is the cause. The effect is, Mommy and Daddy do not drive much anymore. Each trip is evaluated. Carpools are common considerations. Vacations are not thought vital. Parents who had hoped to show Max the seashore this summer cannot keep the promise they made to themselves and their progeny. Plans did not prove to be predictions.
In 2008, the inconceivable is classified as inevitable. Scientists share a stingy assessment. The environment is no longer stable. Nor are our lives on the planet Earth. We, worldwide, have passed the point of no return. Globally, groups and individuals pooh-pooh this determination. For them, immediate concerns take precedence over the future.
The question we all inevitably ask, even if not expressed aloud, is, “Will I continue to exist?” If so, “Will my family and I be comfortable?” The answers shade our sense of what is right or wrong. Maxwell hears his Mom and Dad speak of free trade. This is another hazard that haunts them.
The link between economic integration and worker insecurity is also an essential element of explanations for patterns of public opposition to policies aimed at further liberalization of international trade, immigration, and foreign direct investment (FDI) in advanced economies. Economic insecurity may contribute to the backlash against globalization in at least two ways. First is a direct effect in which individuals that perceive globalization to be contributing to their own economic insecurity are much more likely to develop policy attitudes against economic integration.
Second, if globalization limits the capacities of governments to provide social insurance, or is perceived to do so, then individuals may worry further about globalization and this effect is likely to be magnified if labor-market risks are heightened by global integration.
It seems every issue intimidates us. Each challenges the security we crave. All beckon us and cause us to question whether we, Maxwell, or his parents will survive. Our serious fears force us to believe we must separate ourselves from others, from our brothers and sisters. In an earlier speech, echoing the words of Franklin Roosevelt, the eloquent Barack Obama spoke of this situation and how our own anxiety harms us.[ The Presidential hopeful offered solutions.
Understanding this reality requires a reminder of how we arrived at this point. As William Faulkner once wrote, “The past isn’t dead and buried. In fact, it isn’t even past.” We do not need to recite here the history of racial [or economic] injustice in this country. But we do need to remind ourselves that so many of the disparities that exist in the [any] community today can be directly traced to inequalities passed on from an earlier generation that suffered . . .
Legalized discrimination . . . That history helps explain the wealth and income gap . . . and the concentrated pockets of poverty that persists in so many of today’s urban and rural communities.
A lack of economic opportunity . . . and the shame and frustration that came from not being able to provide for one’s family, contributed to the erosion of [all] families – a problem that welfare policies for many years may have worsened. And the lack of basic services in so many urban [and now with “no new taxes” suburban] neighborhoods – parks for kids to play in, police walking the beat, regular garbage pick-up and building code enforcement – all helped create a cycle of violence, blight and neglect that continue to haunt us.
Potential President Obama understands and hopes to help all American realize that we are one. While this vocalization was meant to focus on the more obvious rift between the races, the Senator from Illinois, the community organizer, attempted to advance awareness for what troubles Americans as a whole.
In fact, a similar anger exists within [all] segments of the . . . community. Most working- and middle-class white Americans don’t feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race. Their experience is the immigrant experience – as far as they’re concerned, no one’s handed them anything, they’ve built it from scratch. They’ve worked hard all their lives, many times only to see their jobs shipped overseas or their pension dumped after a lifetime of labor. They are anxious about their futures, and feel their dreams slipping away; in an era of stagnant wages and global competition, opportunity comes to be seen as a zero sum game, in which your dreams come at my expense . . ..
Americans, no matter the color or circumstances might contemplate that anger is “often proved counterproductive” as are resentments. These attitudes distract attention and widen any divide. If Americans are to find a path to understanding, we must accept that our insecurity, our fears need not distract us. We will survive if we work as one.
This time we want to talk about the crumbling schools that are stealing the future of [any child] black children and white children and Asian children and Hispanic children and Native American children. This time we want to reject the cynicism that tells us that these kids can’t learn; that those kids who don’t look like us are somebody else’s problem. The children of America are not those kids, they are our kids, and we will not let them fall behind in a 21st century economy . . ..
This time we want to talk about how the lines in the Emergency Room are filled with whites and blacks and Hispanics [poor and those the government classifies as affluent] who do not have health care; who don’t have the power on their own to overcome the special interests in Washington, but who can take them on if we do it together.
This time we want to talk about the shuttered mills that once provided a decent life for men and women of every race, and the homes for sale that once belonged to Americans from every religion, every region, every walk of life. This time we want to talk about the fact that the real problem is not that someone who doesn’t look like you might take your job; it’s that the corporation you work for will ship it overseas for nothing more than a profit.
This time we want to talk about the men and women of every color and creed who serve together, and fight together, and bleed together under the same proud flag. We want to talk about how to bring them home from a war that never should’ve been authorized and never should’ve been waged, and we want to talk about how we’ll show our patriotism by caring for them, and their families, and giving them the benefits they have earned.
Today, we must be honest with ourselves. We can admit that we are incensed, irritated, infuriated, and irate. These feelings do not immobilize us. Nor do we necessarily need to fight, and be combative. It is time we teach Maxwell and also Maxine, distress can inspire us to dream the of impossible and make it our truth. We, Americans can rise above our bitterness and build bridges to a fine future if we unite.
It is not elitist to speak truth. It is ignorance and obfuscation to deny how we feel and what we fear. We cannot change what we do not acknowledge. Elusion will not bring bliss. We may be insecure; we may question whether we can survive. Indeed, if we act as we have in the past, if we focus on our faith and antipathy, there will be no reason to hope. Americans, divisions have distracted us for too long. To negate our natural response is to restrict our growth. This time citizens of the United States, let us come together. Bitterness can become sweet.
Sources of insecurity. Resources for survival . . .