Comments on: Uncanny Poverty

By: John

John — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 15:58:58 +0000

Nietzsche was right: from guilt springs resentment, from which again springs violence. I hadn’t put that in this reflection, but now that you mention it, it seems we could see Reagan as harnessing resentment-violence in order to change our relation to poverty. Instead of guilt leading to a political response, guilt leads, after Reagan, to an absolute resentment that is justified by the poor’s alleged “moral failure.” It is a sinister cycle. One that keeps us from addressing what, in such a wealthy and organized nation, is utterly addressable.

I really like your point about the poor and books, college. Earl Shorris’ New American Blues tells so many amazing stories about teaching classic literature and philosophy in poor neighborhoods in NYC. It shows just what you’re evoking here: ideas are interesting and human. The “class-association” of inquiry into those ideas further contributes to the sense that the poor aren’t properly human. Or at least so far from “good humans” that we needn’t see our fate as a community in their fate. (“We” and “their,” of course, in quotation marks.)

Thanks for the comment! And it is nice to be posting and discussing again…it had been so long!

By: c

Sun, 03 Feb 2008 05:42:03 +0000

You’ve made excellent points in this post.
i think here in the US, more than anywhere in the world, is poverty viewed as such a personal failure. In other cultures, in other parts of the world, the poor are not viewed with this negative type of judgement.

i sometimes think that when the poor among us are acknowledged, there are feelings guilt in the hearts of those who have. And from that guilt comes resentment. So many times i read discussions about lack of health care, the working poor, homeless “panhandlers”- and so many folks feel that these folks are irresponsible; they ‘should’ve known better’, been smarter. These ideas always come from “hard working tax payers” who feel that they shouldn’t have to be responsible for others who should’ve made better choices in life.

It is easier to accept poverty ‘over there’. Not here because that means all of us are at risk. That’s scary. Over there, we expect there to be poverty because over there is “Third World”, primitive.

As to Edwards speaking on poverty, yet being rich himself, validates your point in that a poor person wouldn’t have the means to reach as many people as someone with money would. And if an impoverished person were to somehow get such air time, who would listen? Would we instead be asking why this person is poor, blaming them for their circumstance?

What struck me also was your illustration with the college students. It made me think of how we perceive poor people- poor people don’t go to college. Poor people don’t read good books. Poor people don’t appreciate what others appreciate. It is assumed that they should not, that they have no right nor should they have the desire.

i am happy that you are posting again. Your insight is thought provoking.

By: rawdawgbuffalo

rawdawgbuffalo — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 22:51:09 +0000

i am just afraid that it may result in a negative for Obama. hook, line and sinker