See The Forgotten Man, written in 1883 by William Graham Sumner (hat tip to Stogie of Saberpoint).The first paragraph is below the fold.
The type and formula of most schemes of philanthropy or humanitarianism is this: A and B put their heads together to decide what C shall be made to do for D. The radical vice of all these schemes, from a sociological point of view, is that C is not allowed a voice in the matter, and his position, character, and interests, as well as the ultimate effects on society through C's interests, are entirely overlooked. I call C the Forgotten Man.Read the entire essay HERE.
Wikipedia's entry about William Graham Sumner is HERE.
There is an almost invincible prejudice that a man who gives a dollar to a beggar is generous and kind-hearted, but that a man who refuses the beggar and puts the dollar in a savings bank is stingy and mean. The former is putting capital where it is very sure to be wasted, and where it will be a kind of seed for a long succession of future dollars, which must be wasted to ward off a greater strain on the sympathies than would have been occasioned by a refusal in the first place. Inasmuch as the dollar might have been turned into capital and given to a laborer who, while earning it, would have reproduced it, it must be regarded as taken from the latter.
ReplyDeleteInteresting take; and now let us think about the circumstances—the social policy fostered by progressive idiotology, that put him on the street to begin with.
Right now I'm reading The Reagan Diaries, I really wonder if we will ever see the day of a mature liberal who can have an honest discussion about anything.
ReplyDeleteCan you imagine John F. Kennedy acting like this girl - immature, snarky, and disingenuous - rather than being a composed, mature adult and just admitting that this is unquestionably waste which needs to be cut out?
It make you wonder if we will ever see the day of a mature liberal who can have an honest discussion about anything.
No, today we have these Progressive Communist loving, Radical thinking Imbeciles running a muck!
Can you imagine Ronald Reagan, or John F. Kennedy acting like these immature, snarky, and disingenuous, anti-American, Marists rather than being a composed, mature adult and just admitting that this is unquestionably waste which needs to be cut out? Or either of them having a former KGB leader telling them how to handel a crisis, or fold and defer to Russia? It’s like saying to Russia....(paraphrased).....”you take the ball, I ain’t got nothing.” How pathetic is that? Its worse than pathetic. Putin made Obama look like a fool on the world stage. And the libs/progressive’s here in America continue to celebrate the incompetence of their hero---that is whats pathetic.
None are more unable to see the forgotten man than labor unions. Ironic, isn't it?
ReplyDeleteInteresting...
ReplyDeleteAmity Shlaes writes about this book in her book of the same title about FDR and the great depression.
FDR, great progressive that he was, stole the idea of "The Forgotten Man" from Sumner, and turned it on its head. Converting the "Forgotten Man" into the poor urchin crushed under the heels of the evil capitalists, FDR became is champion, and William Graham Sumner's true definition was forgotten.
Snarky socialist propagandists love to observe that "Obama is not a brown-skin, anti-war socialist who gives away free health care. You're thinking of Jesus!"
There are many problems with that statement, which ironically is trumpeted most by atheists:
First, Jesus was a swarthy Jew, not brown-skinned. He may have been anti-war (we don't really know) but he was not a socialist, since the concept didn't even exist back then, and he did not advocate forcible redistribution of resources. If anything, he was in favor of the concept of subsidiarity, solving problems at the lowest level, even as he demanded wall look beyond our own family and tribe and see everyone as our brothers and sisters.
Finally, what Jesus gave, he gave from his own bountiful storehouse. Unlike today's socialist progressives, he did not confiscate from others and redistribute it and then take credit for it. So, what Our Lord gave away was indeed a free gift, unlike the socialist redistributionists, who turn unfavored groups upside down and take what falls out of their pockets.
This is what progressives have learned to do: Turn things upside down, pervert the truth, abuse the language in a way eerily predicted by Orwell, thus winning the favor of the masses.
-- Silverfiddle
BRAVO! Great piece, Kurt! I'd like your permission to reprint it at my blog, unless you have other plans. Please let me know asap.
DeleteWe must stand up to the devilfish of this world whose only purpose in life is to ensnare as many victims as possible in their tentacles, and devour them with their powerful beaks. The predatory devilfish must be neutralized.
Sincerely,
FT
FreeThinke:
DeleteIt's all yours, sir!
-- Silverfiddle
Extremely mind blowing! Excellent. Thanks for sharing this AOW. I enjoyed the read. Forgive me for not commenting more about it, but I want to bask in the brilliance of it instead of giving my humble opinion, which might diminish the affect it has had on me and others. Just AWESOME, wow!
ReplyDeleteForgotten, indeed!
ReplyDeleteIt is easy to dismiss the forgotten man. Just ask Barack Obama, who has earned nothing but utter disregard by world leaders. What a disgrace to this country he is …
ReplyDeleteForgotten??? If ONLY THAT were the full extent of it.
ReplyDeleteThis essay reminded me of these words by C.S. Lewis who wrote in a similar vein.
ReplyDelete"Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
~ C.S. Lewis (1898-1963)
ReplyDelete
Tyrants always have some shade of virtue; they support the laws before destroying them. —Voltaire
ReplyDeleteI can only imagine he was speaking about Harry Reid and the ACA.
Yes, Sam. Hairy Red is, indeed, a contemptible, whey-faced little squirt. If only the Republicans in congress had even half the testicular and intestinal fortitude of Ted Cruz, the ACA (Abominable Communist Agenda) could be defeated. Instead, miserable sellouts like John McCain, Mitch McConnell, Orrin Hatch, that stupid fellow who won Ted Kennedy's seat and then threw it away, and the rest of their pusillanimous ilk actively AID and ABET the Communist takeover of our nation.
ReplyDeleteThe enemies WITHIN are far worse than those who openly declare themselves.
It's simply amazing how many different ways and times the Left will try to lie about the supposed impending Government Shutdown.
ReplyDeleteThe Republican Controlled House has passed a bill that fully funds the Government and all it's debts. It simply fails to fund Obama-care, which has not gone into full implementation yet.
If the Senate Democrats or or the Democrat in the Oval offices refuses to allow that bill to become law, they are the ones who shut down the Government, not the Republicans.
Also either a short memory or a poor grasp of history. He forgets that when the Republicans DID shut down the government before Clinton would agree to welfare reform that he had already vetoed three times. But they easily retained a healthy majority in the Congress. Once Clinton caved and agreed to sign that legislation, it ushered in one of our better eras of prosperity and fiscal accountability.
I just hope our current Republicans have as much backbone and gumption to stick to their guns because they are 100% doing the right thing on this.
The Progressives, Liberals, Democrats and their SHEEP Cult members are in FULL FEAR MONGERING, NAME CALLING mode...don't fall for it or BUY INTO IT!
Well, I'll take the unpopular position here: not a fan of the article. At all.
ReplyDeleteIf I'm reading it right, it advocates a social drawism: that those who cannot help themselves, being useless, deserve to die unaided and unhelped. It advocates, in essence, money over human life, for if a person cannot earn enough for himself, his life is worthless as trash. That, btw, was England during Dickin's time. And the reason England was a horrific place to live in if you weren't blue-grass. I'll have to disagree. I see no great evil in charity, or helping those who cannot help themselves. Nor, to be honest, do I see how the working man suffers from aiding the poverty man. If from his pocket, then yes, but charity normally is voluntarily, the upper class funding to help the lowest class. That jab at police made no sense, as Nature is not a perfect policeman. That sort of life was the Wild West, and that was anarchy at worst and mob rule at best.
Maybe I miss-read the article, but I seriously have to disagree with it.
-Wildstar