The Ideological Gulf (Back into the Breach)

It’s unfortunate that what I brought online yesterday was colored by some distracting background noise, and I very much regret that I allowed a defensive reaction to intrude on the larger point I was trying to make. Since that point got lost in the shouting and attacks (and with the acknowledgment that I may have some hitherto unrecognized masochistic pathology), I’m going to try again.

Let’s go all the way back to the original question from Dorian de Wind:

But what I don’t understand is the philosophy of those who don’t have insurance, don’t have health care, don’t have the financial resources–oftentimes have already bankrupted themselves and their families–who would badmouth and even reject a health care reform that, at the very least, would bring some much-needed medical care into their lives.

If it is self-reliance, pride, stoicism, independence, etc., etc. then I understand and salute them.

But, there must be more to it…”

Unlike yesterday, let’s stop right there.

There is obviously more to the opposition to health care reform for some people, but my point wasn’t about generalized opposition, or fear-mongering, or partisanship, or lies and distortions. The original question was about people who need help but are rejecting an expanded social program that would provide it.

Hard as it may be for some to believe, “self-reliance, pride, stoicism, independence, etc., etc.” are the bottom line for some folks. Really and truly.

It’s story time. (It’s kind of a long story. Sorry)

I know a woman who once had a moderately successful small business in Houston. By “moderately successful”, I mean that she was paying her bills on time, feeding and clothing herself, and putting a little bit away each month. As was fairly common here at the time, most of her large clients were oil and gas companies. Thus, when the economy crashed here in the mid-1980s, her business went with it.

In spite of an excellent education that included two masters degrees, she was unfortunately slow to read the tea leaves. Instead of folding up shop and moving on to another source of income immediately, she tried to hold on. She extended her credit card debt to stay afloat as she continued to maintain her inventory and market her services. As income continued to dry up, she went further under water — and there was absolutely nothing she could do about it. She was self-employed, meaning no unemployment benefits and no group medical insurance.

Unsurprisingly, when all was said and done by the end of that decade, she was underwater so far that the surface was no longer visible.

Needing an immediate income stream in a city that was bottomed-out economically, she took a job driving a taxi, and she continued that for the next 18 years — right up until recently when, at 71, it became too demanding for her.

It took nearly two decades, but she’s finally almost out of debt. In the intervening years, though, many things fell by the wayside. Her house deteriorated (as did the neighborhood it’s in). Her health is relatively good, but the lack of dental care set up some very painful difficulties. She has, however, managed to get a new pair of glasses — meaning she now has two uncracked lenses and both side temple attachments.

Her house is less dilapidated these days as well. Over the last five years-ish (after many arguments about it), her family has been replacing failed appliances and systems. She now has heat and an air-conditioner, for example (after nearly 10 years in Houston without one), and a refrigerator (that ice chest really didn’t hold much).

Now some folks might say that this woman was a prime candidate for bankruptcy. Legally, they’d be right. Yet approaching her on the topic was to invite an angry backlash. She had, she said, done this to herself, and she would get herself out of it.

For a very long time, she was part of the “working poor”, and if anyone could use public assistance, she could. Her social security is laughably too little, and she’s had to reverse mortgage her home to hold onto it… but she won’t take anything more than what she contributed toward for herself. The very thought of having external parties — strangers – contributing to her well-being still sends her right over the edge.

She’s neither ignorant nor racist, and while I often disagree vehemently with her politics, I have enormous respect for the honesty and consistency of her positions.

Therefore, when people suggest that there must be something more than just pride, or independence, or a desire for self-reliance, motivating someone who needs but does not want more governmental social programs, I have to disagree. There does not have to be more to it. However much it may seem to you, they’re not working against their self-interests; they’re staying true to their personal values.

I know this because I know this lady very very well. She’s my mother.

Now maybe she’s just an anomaly. Perhaps every other person in this country would have asked for public assistance in her situation.

Or maybe she just embodies a personal worldview and value system that is hard for well-intended liberals to understand. I guess that’s only fair, since she struggles (unsuccessfully) to understand them — and that’s the ideological gulf to which I referred yesterday. It’s difficult to articulate, it’s easy to attack (by both sides)… and it encompasses far more than the current debates about health care.

I understand her, though. Even as I recognize — and even empathize with — someone who might choose a different path, I see exactly where she’s coming from.

Do you?