Posted on 11/06/2007 9:13:56 AM PST by jazusamo
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Among the many mindless mantras of our time, "making a difference" and "giving back" irritate me like chalk screeching across a blackboard.
I would be scared to death to "make a difference" in the way pilots fly airliners or brain surgeons operate. Any difference I might make could be fatal to many people.
Making a difference makes sense only if you are convinced that you have mastered the subject at hand to the point where any difference you might make would be for the better.
Very few people have mastered anything that well beyond their own limited circle of knowledge. Even fewer seem to think far enough ahead to consider that question. Yet hardly a day goes by without news of some uninformed busybodies on one crusade or another.
Even the simplest acts have ramifications that spread across society the way waves spread across a pond when you drop a stone in it.
Among those who make a difference by serving food to the homeless, how many have considered the history of societies which have made idleness easy for great numbers of people?
How many have studied the impact of drunken idlers on other people in their own society, including children who come across their needles in the park -- if they dare to go to the parks?
How many have even considered such questions relevant as they drop their stone in the pond without thinking about the waves that spread out to others?
Maybe some would still do what they do, even if they thought about it. But that doesn't mean that thinking is a waste of time.
"Giving back" is a similarly mindless mantra.
I have donated money, books and blood for people I have never seen and to whom I owe nothing. Nor is that unusual among Americans, who do more of this than anyone else.
But we are not "giving back" anything to those people because we never took anything from them in the first place.
If we are giving back to society at large, in exchange for all that society has made possible for us, then that is a very different ballgame.
Giving back in that sense means acknowledging an obligation to those who went before us and for the institutions and values that enable us to prosper today. But there is very little of this spirit of gratitude and loyalty in many of those who urge us to "give back."
Indeed, many who repeat the "giving back" mantra would sneer at any such notion as patriotism or any idea that the institutions and values of American society have accomplished worthy things and deserve their support, instead of their undermining.
Our educational system, from the schools to the universities, are actively undermining any sense of loyalty to the traditions, institutions and values of American society.
They are not giving back anything except condemnation, often depicting sins common to the human race around the world as peculiar evils of "our society."
A classic example is slavery, which is repeatedly drummed into our heads -- in the schools and in the media -- as something unique done by white people to black people in the United States.
The tragic fact is that, for thousands of years of recorded history, people of every race and color have been both slaves and enslavers.
The Europeans enslaved on the Barbary Coast of North Africa alone were far more numerous than all the Africans brought to the United States and to the 13 colonies from which it was formed.
What was unique about Western civilization was that it was the first civilization to turn against slavery, and that it stamped out slavery not only in its own societies but in other societies around the world during the era of Western imperialism.
That process took well over a century, because non-Western societies resisted. White people, as well as black people, were still being bought and sold as slaves, decades after the Emancipation Proclamation freed blacks in the United States.
Those who want to "give back" should give back the truth. It is a debt that is long overdue.
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of Basic Economics: A Citizen's Guide to the Economy.
This man is irreplaceable.
this is a great column.
Didn't realize it was that widespread, but we do have at least one documented case in our family tree that I know about.
It all goes back to the liberal creation myth: "In the beginning, there was a huge pile of cash in the desert - but dead white males got there first and stole it all." ;)
Amen Dr. Sowell!
I too, have always reacted viscerally to the phrase: “giving back.” I think it’s because it conjures up the lefty “zero-sum” economic worldview in which, if one makes a lot of money,it has to be through the taking it from the pocket of someone else less fortunate (presumably the proletariat).
In any case, right thinking populists know that if you’re rich you had to do something bad to get that way.
“Comrade commissar, my neighbor, Ivan Ivanovich, has two cows while I have only one. Please comrade, shoot my neighbor’s cow so we can both be equal again.”
They are not giving back anything except condemnation, often depicting sins common to the human race around the world as peculiar evils of "our society."
Put me on the Sowell ping list. He is the GREATEST political and cultural writer out there. Nobody even comes close.
Tagline worthy.
This is the reason libs fail so badly. They think it is enough that they INTEND good things. Never mind that they don't know enough to accurately predict the impact of their meddling. Vanity overrides consequences.
Thanks for the link, it’s an interesting account. I didn’t realize it was so widespread either.
Welcome Clemenza, you’re on.
Incidentally, I loved this column.
Of course, I rarely “dislike” a Sowell column.
The clintons started both of these mantras.
Another example is the dishonest naming of government "gun buy-back" programs.
I think the most insidious of the ‘make a difference’ crowd are the self styled journalists who use this mantra as an excuse to lunge into advocacy at every opportunity. I suppose they don’t deserve all the blame, however, because you can hardly go to a college commencement without hearing some witless politician or air head celebrity talking head encouraging the practice.
Great column.
Tonight, our Scouts will be passing out grocery bags for a canned food drive. We’ll go back out Saturday morning to collect them. While we are certainly helping those less fortunate and a few no-good leeches, we’re certainly not giving anything back.
Being in Michigan, there are plenty of people who have become recently poor due to loss of jobs and the pathetic demonrat economy.
Agreed...They’re a waste of time and money.
“Giving back in that sense means acknowledging an obligation to those who went before us and for the institutions and values that enable us to prosper today. But there is very little of this spirit of gratitude and loyalty in many of those who urge us to “give back.”
Sounds like Ortega y Gasset.
He’s at his best when he adds a tinge of humor to his great perceptions and insights.
He’s at his worst when he tries to come off purely scholarly and authoritatively — indistinguishable from the pompous aholes in academia and media.
I really don’t think Sowell has a pretentious bone in his body. If he comes off as scholarly sometimes I think that’s becuase he is scholarly. He speaks of what he knows and admits what he doesn’t.
There is, of course, nothing at all wrong with hoping to improve other people's lives, and it is not at all wrong to influence young people to aspire to do so. It is in one sense the search for meaning in a meaningless life, an indispensible part of the search for self. But this is corrupted when it becomes nothing more than an expression of self, the notion that other people are nothing more than a canvas upon which one may paint one's own life. That is pure narcissism, a trap it is easy for a young person (and not a few older ones) to fall into.
Bumpitttt.
He doesn’t have to be pretentious.
But the communication style of academia and media is pretentious — and sometimes he uses that language and communication style (because of his training) — when he should distinguish himself by rising above it completely and creating a whole new standard for his observations.
This article seems to be written in the great tradition of political humor like a Mark Twain or Will Rogers — which is that common touch, while not reveling in their mediocrity. It’s a fine balance that he seems uniquely talented to define in the coming years — that creates a whole new genre of political/cultural writing — beyond the petty partisanship the newspapers have unfortunately excelled at — to their own destruction.
I think he’s an evolutionary step and not just the best of a bad breed.
The only things that liberal universities produce is pacifist socialists who already are anti-American, anti-military, anti-capitalism and anti-Christianity and Conservatism. Yeah, that is what parents pay money for. Brainwashing.
One notable time I tried "giving back" by repairing a poor family's furniture. While fixing the couch, one girl asked if I had a large plastic sheet. "Why?" "We tore out the window screen and need something to cover the window now." Tore out the screen? I looked at the couch, considered the screen, wrapped up my repairs and left.
One is free to squander what one has; that does not obligate others to provide more to squander.
The Magnificent Obsession; its sloppy remake, Pay it Forward are two examples of the same mindset which he decries.
It seems to me that very little of it is not narcissism. The only kind of helping that isn't narcissism is that which is done with the full consent of both parties based upon a clearly defined agreement bewteen them. AA is one that follows these guidelines, and maybe the Salvation Army. Most government helping is not.
Remind any liberal that you happen to be discussing this with -
your support of socialism
IN NO WAY
satisfies your individual requirement to help the needy and poor.
Even though they insist that we examine their intentions instead of the results, I don’t think that good intentions are what are driving most libs.
What’s driving them is their inherent sense of superiority and “I know better” - they are entitled to tell everyone else how to live.
Couple this with a rejection (lack of understanding?) of the idea that incentives drive human behavior, and you have the dangerous combination you see in the modern lib.
Somebody ought to send this to the self-righteous morons who promote that silly “make a difference day” in the newspaper supplement. The people who send in their story to be noticed for their incredible goodness are insufferable. Many of them are kids, who spend no time or $ supporting themselves, and thus have plenty of time to go aroung “being involved” and “doing good”. It’s enough to make you hurl.
Then there are the pro athletes who are expected to serve bums in soup kitchens. What an incredible waste of their time! Would it not make more sense for the athletes to donate some $ to the organization so they could hire some person who needs a job? Why, maybe even someone who comes to the soup kitchen for food! What a novel concept - working to feed yourself!
This constant barrage of people trying to outdo one another on how “giving” they are is disgusting.
Oh, how “judgemental” of you.
You provide an example of people whom the libs insist are entitled to the confiscated wealth that you generate.
LOL! Reminds me of the one about two Soviets sharing a urinal just after the Red revolution. "Comrade Andrei, here we stand, yet I am the son of a peasant and you are the son of a prince! But why is it that I sound like the great Volga River cascading over the rocks, while from you I hear nothing?"
"That's because I am peeing on your coat, peasant!"
Ditto.
bfl
In Dallas the "Slaughter House" is known by its proper name "Baylor Medical Center." When Mr. Slaughter donated his money to "provide health care to the needy" he was asked if he would like to see his name on the Hospital. His answer, "No Thank You. I don't think a Slaughter Hospital would attract many sick!"
The big government freaks are jealous of the selfless manner in which the rich have given back. Solution? Diss the Rich and then take from them so that they can appear to be the munificent individuals.
Phooey!
Good Article as is to be expected.
Vanity cannot override consequences, but "liberal" vanity does override prudence and responsibility and humility.
LOL!!! Outstanding!
I disagree. His "Ethnic America" is still the best scholarly description of the ethnic experience in this country.
Ping
I LOVE this man and I don’t care WHO knows it. :)
Have you read any of his “race and culture” series?
“Being in Michigan, there are plenty of people who have become recently poor due to loss of jobs and the pathetic demonrat economy.”
And yet, they’ll continue to vote the ‘Rats in, won’t they? Wisconsin is going down the same path. Grrrrrr!
Easily the most startling conclusion of his research: Mr. Sander calculated that there are fewer black attorneys today than there would have been if law schools had practiced color-blind admissions--about 7.9% fewer by his reckoning. He identified the culprit as the practice of admitting minority students to schools for which they are inadequately prepared. In essence, they have been "matched" to the wrong school
I also meant to add that I do as Sowell does. I give blood, because saving a life matters in more cases than not and I can always make more. ;)
I donate books because KNOWLEDGE matters, and stupid people cost us all money in the long run.
When anyone within our circle of family and friends dies, we all chip in and buy books for the library in their name in titles that were relevant to them while they were alive. I’d hope others might do this as well; it’s a great memorial!
I give usable clothing and household items because I certainly would like for them to have one more “life” before they go to the landfill, which is where everything ends up eventually.
Works for me. I sleep peacefully at night. :)
“But this is corrupted when it becomes nothing more than an expression of self, the notion that other people are nothing more than a canvas upon which one may paint one’s own life. That is pure narcissism, a trap it is easy for a young person (and not a few older ones) to fall into.”
Well said, Mr. Bill! ‘The Oprah’ and her ‘School for Girls in Afrika’ leaps immediately to mind. Blech!
Big bump, Diana! They don't come any better than Dr. Sowell.
EX. ACT. LY. There is no civilization in the world that didn't practice slavery, but there is only one that came up with the belief that slavery was inherently wrong.
That the rest of the world (at least nominally) eschews slavery today is the result of one thing and one thing only: Western dominance.
And please note that slavery is rampant in the world of our ("The West's) collective enemies, the islamic world. Interesting how the left supports them in their battle for world domination.
Mark
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.