Returning briefly to the subject of America as a family

Last updated on: September 16, 2011 at 1:06 pm by Roger E. Olson

Returning briefly to the subject of America as a family 2011-09-16T13:06:40-05:00 Roger E. Olson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

A couple weeks ago I posted here a guest column I wrote for the local newspaper in which I argued that there are two kinds of people in America–those who view Americans as a quasi-family (not literally family but like an extended family held loosely together by bonds of care and obligation) and those who view it as a group of individuals competing with each other for limited resources and wealth.

Some of the responses here and in letters to the editor were very negative. Some people objected to thinking of America as a family without admitting that they view it as a group of individuals competing with each other.

The purpose of my essay was to explain why we American have such profoundly different views of the problem of poverty and potential solutions to it. IF you view America as a family or quasi-family (as I think almost all really do as I’ll explain below) you SHOULD think poverty is your problem as well as that of the poor. And, I will argue below, you SHOULD think the solution to it is public and not just private (i.e., charity).

IF you view poverty as not at all your problem, that reveals that you do not think of America as in any way like a family–except when it comes to OTHER issues than poverty. So below I want to point out what I see as an inconsistency on the parts of many people who objected to my suggestion that we should and DO (often) think of America as a family.

I didn’t want to bring this up on “9-11” because that was a day or remembering the dead; I don’t think it’s appropriate to sully the solemnity of the day with debate. However, I noticed what I think is a profound inconsistency within many Americans.

Nearly EVERYONE expressed some degree of sadness that day for those who lost their lives in the attacks. To me that reveals they really DO think of America as a family or quasi-family. It reveals they DO think we are “in this together.” Many people said or thought that attacks on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon and on the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania were attacks on all of us Americans.

But why? If you don’t think of America as a family IN SOME SENSE, why feel anything (except perhaps fear) about the terrorist attacks of 9-11? If you were not affected by the events of that day through knowing someone who died (or was wounded, etc.), why feel sorrow or grief about them? Horror, perhaps. But why grief? Why empathy? To you the people who died were simply your competitors for America’s limited resources. They were strangers. Why is the fact they were (mostly) Americans meaningful to you in any way OTHER than a terrorist attack somewhere else in the world would be meaningful. Did you feel the same thing about a terrorist attack in London or Spain or Israel? I suspect most did not. They may have felt shock and even perhaps some degree of sadness, but I doubt many Americans would watch a day-long ceremony of remembrance for those terrorist attacks or put out their flag for them or do anything else similar to what most of us did on 9-11-11.

So here’s my question. Why do we tend to feel something family-like about Americans we don’t even know who suffer tragedy–especially in a terrorist attack–if we don’t feel anything for Americans suffering poverty. (Now, by “poverty” I am not talking about that which is chosen; I’m talking about poverty due to misfortune–loss of job, racial oppression, illness, etc.) Isn’t this a double standard? I think so. Where does it come from? Why do we have this double standard such that when we hear about or see on TV Americans killed in terrorist attacks we have this gut-level reaction of grief as if they were family whereas when we hear about or see on TV Americans dying because they don’t have health insurance or going hungry because they have no work or living in a shack because of personal calamity we don’t feel anything except perhaps some revulsion?

I suspect there are several reasons for this. One is propaganda that many of us have believed that says all poor people are poor by choice (even if only due to bad choices). As one leading neo-conservative thinker said in a talk on youtube: In America anyone can get out of poverty in five years or less. Really? I suspect he doesn’t know many poor people. I know many poor people who are poor due to illness or disability or chronic unemployment or underemployment in spite of searching for jobs for months and years.

Another, related, reason is television. Where do we see poor people on television? I can’t think of a single network television show featuring a poor family since a couple of 1980s sitcoms that exploited the plights of poor African-Americans. In recent years, to the best of my knowledge, all the people in prime time entertainment programs are middle class or wealthy. (Have you noticed how many of those who are portrayed as middle class live in luxurious apartments or houses in cities where that kind of housing would cost a fortune?)

I suspect our society conditions us to assume all poverty is due to sloth. Then, somehow, many Americans have come to objectify the poor as “low class” (willfully ignorant or lazy) and deserving of their plights. They might feel some pity, but they feel no obligation to them.

So what about America’s responses to 9-11 versus many Americans’ responses to poverty? Many Americans think the only right solution to poverty (other than the poor pulling themselves up by their bootstraps) is charity. But who would think America’s right solution to terrorism is voluntary patrolling of buildings terrorists might attack? No, we all agree the right response is government action to increase security at great cost and considerable inconvenience (e.g., at airports) to all of us–even if we feel that we are extremely unlikely ever to be the victims of terrorism.

I could go on by talking about calamities and disasters that befall cities. When Joplin, Missouri was hit by a devastating tornado almost everyone in America expressed sadness and empathy for the victims. Much help poured in, but not nearly enough to rebuild the houses and schools and hospitals. We ALL agree that in such cases of mass devastation the government needs to step in with aid. If left to charity alone, New Orleans and Joplin and cities like them would never rise from their devastation.

To me that reveals that Americans do TEND to think of our country as an extended family–except when it comes to poverty and the poor.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

September 14, 2011

Is hell part of the gospel? (Read all of this or don't read any of it!)

Next Post

September 17, 2011 An invitation to read and discuss (here) an important new book

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Against Liberal Theology Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

In Revelation, what is the correct sequence of events in the End Times?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Dragon cast to earth, beast rises from sea, false prophet rises from earth, mark of the beast given False prophet rises, dragon cast to earth, beast rises from sea, mark of the beast given Mark of the beast given, dragon cast to earth, beast rises, false prophet rises Beast rises from sea, dragon cast to earth, mark of the beast given, false prophet rises