I Live Where You Live...

...and that makes it the place where WE live. So why is it that WE are unable to work together to find solutions?

I truly don't think that it is a decision that we have made, most of us, that individual action is the only virtuous action. I do not believe that anything but a fractional minority of us have decided that the best course of action would be to abolish government, disband or prohibit all communitarian activities, fend for ourselves and "devil take the hindmost."

Any rational actor with eyes wide open will concede that "the hindmost" are part of the problem and that leaving them to the devil is a recipe for anarchy, depletion, and exponentially greater problems.

In "Our American King," a recent novel, David Lozell Martin posits a near future in which the superrich, anticipating the coming collapse, use the tools of government to secure themselves ALL the benefits, including the benefits of an armed military, to wait out the economic collapse. All the resources for survival as WE know it are at their disposal, but withheld from 99% of the populace, resulting in a breakdown of American civilization.

So very few would willingly sign on to such an outcome that it is difficult to think that any significant number of us would actively believe in a society of nobles and serfs. Because all of us would be the serfs.

So if it isn't a rational ideology, why do so many of us look at elections and government as a needless exercise that will not, indeed can not make any difference? Why do so many abdicate the responsibility of voting for those who espouse support for the policies that would truly make our collective lives richer, more fulfilling, and simply better?

But it is not just the hindmost. It is our families, our neighbors, our friends who suffer from a city that has grown dysfunctional, a leadership that has abandoned any sense of responsibility, and a citizenry that lives in fear and resignation. When a parent fears to let his child outside in the yard because their neighborhood streets have become speedways and pass-throughs for regional traffic, who is to blame?

Don't tell me that the parent should deal with it herself. That's the ultimate expression of the anti-government ideology. Without a regime of law enforcement, any parent who would be so bold as to try to enforce a speeding ordinance is more likely to be beaten or shot than to effectively protect the child.

That anti-government ideology is one expressed just this weekend by a candidate for county council. This candidate said "...Government action is sometimes a hinderance (sic) to change and social improvement..." I would submit that government inaction is both a hindrance and an invitation to destructive exploitation of us all. Without consistent government action, we are all at the mercy of the least responsible among us.

You can point to dozens of similar areas, from badly paved streets that add hundreds of dollars to every household's costs of living in this city to irresponsible slumlords who permit meth labs to operate within their rented premises. In fact, I invite you to list areas where good government hinders social improvement. Then list those where government action enhances our lives.

There is rightful disillusionment at large. When one looks at the choices available in the May primaries, it doesn't give one confidence that things are about to change.

Which brings me to my inspiration for today's somewhat out-of-character posting.

The New York Times Magazine ran with its Green issue today. Food writer Michael Pollan contributed an essay about individual action vis-a-vis global warming and its possible futility in the face of cataclysm. It's called "Why Bother?"

A single paragraph in that outstanding essay gave a reason for us to "bother." Here's the paragraph, and though it pulls politics into its "green" message, the underlying principle is purely political.

Going personally green is a bet, nothing more or less, though it’s one we probably all should make, even if the odds of it paying off aren’t great. Sometimes you have to act as if acting will make a difference, even when you can’t prove that it will. That, after all, was precisely what happened in Communist Czechoslovakia and Poland, when a handful of individuals like Vaclav Havel and Adam Michnik resolved that they would simply conduct their lives “as if” they lived in a free society. That improbable bet created a tiny space of liberty that, in time, expanded to take in, and then help take down, the whole of the Eastern bloc.

The New Albany blogosphere has, from time to time, resounded with similar sentiment.

Involvement and engagement, moreover, expectation is our bet. Sometimes you have to act as if acting will make a difference, even when you can't prove that it will.

Good night, and good luck.