Russell,

Aren't the failures that you pointed out the failures of society in general which are reflected in the government rather than the other way around?

For once, I think I agree with you. When I think of the tax bill we will saddle today's youth with, I shudder. It is not just the war in Iraq, it is the 35% FICA tax they will be paying to keep benefits going and locally things like FPDR which will keep ratcheting up for 30+ years and then PERS eating up school funding, I am not happy either. It is the ignorance of 30+ years of politicians not coming up with a cohesive enrgy policy, but rather wasting time on witch-hunts against both parties.

I agree; as a society, we seem to be suffering from "me-ness". Where is the Oregon society of Tom McCall that embraced the greater good to keep the beaches public, that voluntarily curbed energy use and adopted recycling to prevent the squandering of scarce resources, that told industries not to come to Oregon unless they would help preserve it, and that adopted the nation's most comprehensive land use plan to protect the land for future generations?

An excellent post that I hope initiates a much fuller taking stock of where we are and what we need to do.

Your essay just scratches the surface of what is wrong though. The development of your thesis starts to stumble with this comment:

This is not one of those gratuitous criticisms of the “Baby Boomer Generation” so much in fashion these days. Many boomers are as astonished and angry at the lack of respect for the public patrimony as anyone else. The source of this lack of respect for the public realm is very specific. It is the self-absorbed narcissism of the “selfish is good” philosophy of Ayn Rand and her ideological acolytes combined with the Libertarian libel that there is no such thing as the “common good.” The only legitimate interest is self-interest, and taxation to support the “common good” is theft. It is the guiding philosophy of the self-styled conservatives that dominate the governing generation.

The gratuitous topic sentence of this paragraph This is not one of those gratuitous... demeans the very important thesis whose development you just began here. Just as Many boomers are as astonished ..., some of those boomers who are astonished are conservatives and libertarians. The fact is that the self-absorbed narcissism as you label it spans the political spectrum. It is just on our side this not very attractive characteristic manifests itself differently. On our side it manifests itself as a certain smugness about allegedly superior personal and political values, but only standing up for and pursuing those values so long as one is not disadvantaged by the policies that would result if those values were faithfully put into practice.

There is a world of difference between supporting the "progressive" position on a matter because one benefits personally from the matter, and supporting that position because one's values say it is the right thing to do when one does not personally benefit, or even is personally disadvantaged, from the consequences of those positions as they are actually manifested in actions by the institutions of our society. It is the difference between the self-centered consumerist approach to self-governance itself, and a genuine commitment to the common good. And in recognizing that we do not individually get to define what the "common good" is.

Your essay is an excellent start. But the construction of your essay in which you blame an easily (and properly) demonized "other" at the margin, rather than to actually explore how the immediate failures to protect the common good that you describe directly trace to this deeper flaw in our society, does not do full justice to the matter. There is a combination of self-centeredness and incompetence from the street to academia at the business of making society that has become more acute starting with our generation. The self-centered narcissism you cite is just a manifestation of the extreme margins, but you undermine the potential of your essay by arguing that this is main problem rather than simply the outward symptom of a much deeper problem that actually knows no superficial political boundaries.

Right on Russell. We are now living in what will be known as "The Least Generation".

Instead of taxing wealth to pay for the common good, we borrow money from the wealthy and have to pay them back, with interst. (What a deal!)

Instead of mutual self sacrifice for the war on terrorists, we largely depend on an economically challenged population to fill the ranks, and cut taxes on the wealthy to "stimulate the economy", thereby assuring the more well off among us, and even most middle class citizens, have little to personally risk, so little personal motivation to kick the bums out of office.

Our so called leaders ignore the one thing that could really change the landscape in the middle east, green fuel effeciency, because there is no money in that. You can't sell the sun, you can't patent the wind, and no one owns the tide.

Thanks for the post - it sums up a lot of what I think about.

I also think that along with the shift from a "sharing/caring" government to a "selfish" government that you outline, there has been a shift in our political parties.

From time to time, our political parties change. I think that the last 25 years or so, dating to the election of Ronald Reagan, mark such a period of shift. Prior to that time, both major political parties believed in the common good of government. Based upon that shared belief, governance in a bi-partisan manner was possible. The Republicans believed in smaller government, but government that worked; and the Democrats believed in a wider vision of government that was oriented towards investment in people.

It used to be that the Republicans were fiscal conservatives and believed in States rights. It used to be that the Republicans believed that government should let people live their lives with the least interference possible. -- How times have changed -- Now the Republicans in leadership positions are history's worst budget managers, and commonly use Federal power to overrule State's rights.

Take for example K-12 education. The old guard Republican's believed that this was the job of the States. They believed that each State should determine its own path with this, but added supplemental funds for things like special education. Today, they have implemented a strategy that is overruling each State's approach to education with national standards, using the threat of pulling Federal funds to induce cooperation, and if schools don't meet standards - they are defunded by moving out the students. Ultimately, with the escalating standards, to the point where it will be impossible for schools to meet the standards in about 8 more years, this program will lead to privatization of nearly all American K-12 education.

And where are the Democrats while this massive change has gone on?

Well, the Democrats have become the party of fiscal restraint and responsibility. The Democrats have become in comparison to the new radical Republicans the conservative/traditional party holding to the old views of the role of government - like preserving Social Security and providing a good education for all.

It's a role reversal of historic levels. Oddly, some of the readers of Blue Oregon don't get this. Mainly our Republican defenders that regularly write here don't understand that the Republican leadership has taken a radical course - the destruction of the American form of governance that has represented the best of America - a government that cares about the welfare of its people.

Russ, I too have had my very sad moments when I think of this.

Of course! It all makes sense now. Kudos to you, Comrade Sadler! It's about time someone came up with a nationalistic scapegoat theme capable of uniting all the cynical, corrupt interests of freedom-hating paternalism, be they rightwing authoritarians or leftwing collectivists, National Greatness Republicans or Third Way Democrats, reactionary xenophobes or radical class warmongers.

The blame for all America's social, cultural, economic and political woes today can be lain at the feet of none other than....the Libertarians!

A thought provoking post. I am skeptical that thoughtful analysis can occur on a "blog" (see above) but here goes . . .

Is the notion that the next generation must necessarily be "better off" something that is unique to the USA? In much of Europe and the 3rd world, if your children take over your place in life (baker's son becomes a baker, farmer's son becomes a farmer, etc.) people consider their destiny to be successfully fulfilled. Here, if you are a baker, you want your daughter to be a brain surgeon and your grandaughter to be the CEO of Microsoft. In light of the fact that the USA is being eclipsed in the global economy by China and India and whoever, is it realistic that the next generation in the USA will be better off? Or are they unlucky enough to be born as the star of the USA is descending, whereas our parents and grandparents were born while it was ascending?

If the US is descending, the Republicans are doing what they can to speed up the descent, but I am not sure they are solely to blame.

Just wondering.

Mr. Russell wrote:

"This ideology denies the fundamental reason that societies organize communities in the first place -- to respond to needs people cannot meet individually."

No Mr. Russell it is the other way around communities organize societies to protect themselves from the wanton avarice of those who would enslave or canibolize their neighbors in the name of the "common good". See the preamble to the declaration of independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men"

Ayn Rand was right: "No one's welfare can be achieved by anyone's sacrifice."

Russell,

You raise fundamental questions – philosophical ones – that deserve (actually require) a response at that level.

You start with: I was brought up to believe, like many of you readers, that we had a moral obligation to leave our corner of the world better off than we found it. In recent years, I am haunted by the notion that our present governing generation -- a majority of self-styled “conservatives” -- may be the first in modern American history to fail to meet this obligation.

I agree, we are leaving the world worse off. That’s the easy part. The challenge is to understand why. You express it as a failure to properly acknowledge the “common good”. And that begs the questions of what IS the common good. That’s what I want to address. In your context…

You later say: Many boomers are as astonished and angry at the lack of respect for the public patrimony as anyone else. The source of this lack of respect for the public realm is very specific. It is the self-absorbed narcissism of the “selfish is good” philosophy of Ayn Rand and her ideological acolytes combined with the Libertarian libel that there is no such thing as the “common good.” The only legitimate interest is self-interest, and taxation to support the “common good” is theft. It is the guiding philosophy of the self-styled conservatives that dominate the governing generation.

This ideology denies the fundamental reason that societies organize communities in the first place -- to respond to needs people cannot meet individually.

I think you are missing a couple of critical distinctions.

1) We have a fundamental choice between collectivism (patrimony?) and individualism (selfishness?). Which is the independent variable and which is the dependent one? Are we just cells in a superhuman organism or is the individual the sovereign unit and society is a collection of interacting individuals, each acting out of self interest and respecting others acting on the same principle. That is a win-win relationship among people. They come together when it serves their goals and go their separate ways when that best serves their goals.

Ayn Rand, as a means to the end of her art as a romantic realist novelist, rethought the foundations of philosophy. Her goal was to represent human life as it could and should be in her best judgment. Having studied philosophy and history in college, she knew that what our culture offered did not meet her standards. So she rethought those foundations over many years. A lot of that is now coming out as her early writing and journals are being made public. The typically disconnected from reality academics are just starting to see the value in this original thinking. -- But that doesn’t make the case for why it’s worthy of respect.

So this first point I made is a fundamental choice which informs all that follows. Also, it is dependent on some lower layers in philosophy of how do we know and what is knowable. This is not the forum for covering all of that, but I recommend you and your readers take a closer look – starting with her collection on Ethics: “The virtue of selfishness”. For more information you can follow this link.

2) That brings me to the second critical distinction – “selfishness” as the term is commonly, pejoratively used vs. Rand’s intention.

She chose to emphasize that term to get to the essence of ethics. It’s the responsibility to think and act to further one’s life. The forces she was countering is non-thinking action of followers who are primarily obedient. This is commonly achieved by offering up the package deal of the common good. The best meaning of that blurry term is to allow individuals interact according to their own judgment of the good – emphasis on judgment. The common good is the respect for the individuals and their opportunity to achieve happiness.

This is essentially about sacrifice – giving up more value for less value – vs. the absence of sacrifice. Trading win-win is no sacrifice, all gain. That is her standard of ethics and respect for the individual – every individual with all the rights and responsibilities that are appropriate for the sovereign nature of them.

3) On Social Security – there is a lot you can read on the way money was taken on one pretense and used for another. It was not invested for the benefit of the payers’ retirement, but rather went into the general pot for politicians to spend for what they always do – to further their getting reelected by taking from the more successful and giving to the larger number of less successful – to buy votes. The average return on the investment for the beneficiaries is an order of magnitude below what any responsible investment would have returned. We're being robbed.
For more information see this link.

Humans deserve better,

Jay Conne

I was brought up to believe, like many of you readers, that we had a moral obligation to leave our corner of the world better off than we found it. In recent years, I am haunted by the notion that our present governing generation -- a majority of self-styled “conservatives” -- may be the first in modern American history to fail to meet this obligation. I like a few of you readers, was brought up to do what is right. Believe in the Lord, be honest and forthright, work hard, be true to your family, ‘If you don’t have something good to say, shut up’, be generous of spirit and be humble, be loyal to friends, family and country….the rest was up to you, follow your heart.

There are many signs that the legacy of the governing generation will be a world worse off. It is not limited to the bungled Iraq War and the consequences of a destabilized Middle East, the corrupt looting of the public treasury by rampant cronyism, the incompetence that led to the slow drowning of a great American city, live on on CNN, or the shameless promotion of legislation legalizing torture after the fact. These are symptoms of a larger ill.

No ax to grind here. Lets blame Bush! How dare he not stop a hurricane! How dare he not override the state governor or the cities mayor! How dare he not grant US citizenship status to terrorists!

The fundamental problem with the governing generation that dominates the Republican Party is a lack of respect for the public patrimony created by the work and wealth of the generations that came before us. This lack of respect is displayed at every level of government. Please, show me where the public patrimony is guaranteed in our Constitution. Ther is none. We have the right to PURSUE our own happiness…it is God given, not granted by men and is recognized by our Constitution…but you guys don’t believe in God do you? So I guess we can just throw all that folderol out the window. From the Bush regime’s squandering of our reputation in the world....to cynical congressional efforts to destroy Social Security....to the public’s unwillingness to pay to maintain public infrastructure like streets, roads, highways and sewers....to the neglect of national, state and local parks....to the refusal of state governments to adequately finance public colleges and universities, the governing generation is ungratefully turning its back on the legacy built by previous generations.

Hmmmm, fear mongering? Not one BIT of basis in fact or reality. Publics unwillingness? WHO are you kidding? How many BILLIONS are we spending in poor drowning New Orleans? It is just never enough for liberals…..ever. They will only be happy when we are all in the sewer living like 3rd world socialists.

This is not one of those gratuitous criticisms of the “Baby Boomer Generation” so much in fashion these days. Many boomers are as astonished and angry at the lack of respect for the public patrimony as anyone else. The source of this lack of respect for the public realm is very specific. It is the self-absorbed narcissism of the “selfish is good” philosophy of Ayn Rand and her ideological acolytes combined with the Libertarian libel that there is no such thing as the “common good.” The only legitimate interest is self-interest, and taxation to support the “common good” is theft. It is the guiding philosophy of the self-styled conservatives that dominate the governing generation.

It isn’t? Well of course it isn’t…so many of your local readers still miss Jerry…and he was a boomer right? Jerry, Phil, Bill, Bob and even poor ol Pig Pen had the right idea man. Hanoi Jane was an icon of stability, forthrightness and for the common man right?

This ideology denies the fundamental reason that societies organize communities in the first place -- to respond to needs people cannot meet individually.

Wrongo! Conservatism is entirely about the rights of the individual….not the commune. Our government was formed by giants of intellect and observers of history and human nature. Humble giants unequaled in history with the foresight to know when to step away from power. They recognized…apparently over 200 years before you did…that it is impossible to regulate or legislate equal distribution or opportunity.

Our present patrimony was created largely by those that retired NBC anchor Tom Brokaw called “The Greatest Generation.” This was the generation that lived through the Great Depression or was raised in its shadow. They created Social Security, the single most successful program in the history of public government. Until it was expanded from it’s original form and intent by liberals to become the do-all morass it is today. They fought and won World War II. They generously rebuilt Europe and Japan. They passed the GI Bill offering a college education to those who interrupted their lives to serve their country. This generation understood the “common good” because they had been deprived of it for nearly two decades.

Hmmm…I asked my mom about this. Funny thing was, no one looked to the governmet to be their keeper in those days. No one talked about the common good except communists….and they were smart enough to know where that road led. Apparently liberal thought relies heavily on the dumbing down of America. ..............INSIGHT! THAT’s why schools have no standards any more! DUH!

From 1927, when American agriculture went into depression, until 1946 when the war ended, this generation endured the privation of the Depression and the rationing and wage and price controls of the war. They passed legislation intended to assure that would not happen to any future generation. In the name of “conservative reform” most of those safeguards have been repealed or dismantled. They no longer exist.

Yep…and look how our std of living has sagged! Shame the hell on us! The poor can BARELY afford cell phones!

Nowhere is this destruction of the public patrimony more flagrant than in the systematic, deliberate destruction of public higher education. When I attended the University of Oregon in the mid-1960s, my undergraduate tuition of about $1,000 for the school year reflected 25 percent of the per-student operating cost. Taxpayers paid the remaining 75 percent which they have seen returned in the form of higher income taxes I have paid over the last 40 years. Today, undergraduate tuition starts around $5,800 and reflects 75 percent of the per-student operating cost. Taxpayers are putting up only about 25 percent. And students are being encouraged to borrow the money to pay their bills. Students are graduating with an average debt between $18, 000 - $23,000, mired in debt before they even start their lives.

OH MY GOD! NOT student loans! They may even be asked to……pay them back….OH THE HORROR!

We have destroyed the engine that was a major underpinning of the prosperity the self-styled conservatives enjoyed but will not grant to the next generation. It is ingratitude of criminal proportions. I spent the last week aboard a 30 foot trawler in the State of Washington’s magnificent San Juan Islands. The friends included a single mother and her 8-year-old boy and 10-year-old daughter. As I watched the three of them quietly sleeping in the forward berth after warm, sun-drenched days of whale watching and exploring in the islands, I thought about the intractable problems we are dumping on these innocents and the silent tears just flowed from my eyes. Dear God, what will they think of us when they find out what we’ve done? Kids, this column’s for you.

No dude…the column was entirely about you and your agenda.

<hr/>