8 Great Philosophical Questions That We'll Never Solve
http://io9.com/5945801/8-philosophical-questions-that-well-never-solve
-
Leadership is about change, but what is a leader to do when faced with ubiquitous resistance? Resistance to change manifests itself in many ways, from foot-dragging and inertia to petty sabotage to outright rebellions. The best tool for leaders of change is to understand the predictable, universal sources of resistance in each situation and then strategize around them. Here are the ten I've found to be the most common.
Loss of control. Change interferes with autonomy and can make people feel that they've lost control over their territory. It's not just political, as in who has the power. Our sense of self-determination is often the first things to go when faced with a potential change coming from someone else. Smart leaders leave room for those affected by change to make choices. They invite others into the planning, giving them ownership.
Excess uncertainty. If change feels like walking off a cliff blindfolded, then people will reject it. People will often prefer to remain mired in misery than to head toward an unknown. As the saying goes, "Better the devil you know than the devil you don't know." To overcome inertia requires a sense of safety as well as an inspiring vision. Leaders should create certainty of process, with clear, simple steps and timetables.
Surprise, surprise! Decisions imposed on people suddenly, with no time to get used to the idea or prepare for the consequences, are generally resisted. It's always easier to say No than to say Yes. Leaders should avoid the temptation to craft changes in secret and then announce them all at once. It's better to plant seeds — that is, to sprinkle hints of what might be coming and seek input.
Everything seems different. Change is meant to bring something different, but how different? We are creatures of habit. Routines become automatic, but change jolts us into consciousness, sometimes in uncomfortable ways. Too many differences can be distracting or confusing. Leaders should try to minimize the number of unrelated differences introduced by a central change. Wherever possible keep things familiar. Remain focused on the important things; avoid change for the sake of change.
Loss of face. By definition, change is a departure from the past. Those people associated with the last version — the one that didn't work, or the one that's being superseded — are likely to be defensive about it. When change involves a big shift of strategic direction, the people responsible for the previous direction dread the perception that they must have been wrong. Leaders can help people maintain dignity by celebrating those elements of the past that are worth honoring, and making it clear that the world has changed. That makes it easier to let go and move on.
Concerns about competence. Can I do it? Chang...
When I joined the staff of National Review as a lowly associate in 1984, the magazine, and the conservative movement itself, was a fusion of two different mentalities.
On the one side, there were the economic conservatives. These were people that anybody following contemporary Republican politics would be familiar with. They spent a lot of time worrying about the way government intrudes upon economic liberty. They upheld freedom as their highest political value. They admired risk-takers. They worried that excessive government would create a sclerotic nation with a dependent populace.
But there was another sort of conservative, who would be less familiar now. This was the traditional conservative, intellectual heir to Edmund Burke, Russell Kirk, Clinton Rossiter and Catholic social teaching. This sort of conservative didn't see society as a battleground between government and the private sector. Instead, the traditionalist wanted to preserve a society that functioned as a harmonious ecosystem, in which the different layers were nestled upon each other: individual, family, company, neighborhood, religion, city government and national government.
Because they were conservative, they tended to believe that power should be devolved down to the lower levels of this chain. They believed that people should lead disciplined, orderly lives, but doubted that individuals have the ability to do this alone, unaided by social custom and by God. So they were intensely interested in creating the sort of social, economic and political order that would encourage people to work hard, finish school and postpone childbearing until marriage.
Recently the blogger Rod Dreher linked to Kirk's essay, "Ten Conservative Principles," which gives the flavor of this brand of traditional conservatism. This kind of conservative cherishes custom, believing that the individual is foolish but the species is wise. It is usually best to be guided by precedent.
This conservative believes in prudence on the grounds that society is complicated and it's generally best to reform it steadily but cautiously. Providence moves slowly but the devil hurries.
The two conservative tendencies lived in tension. But together they embodied a truth that was put into words by the child psychologist John Bowlby, that life is best organized as a series of daring ventures from a secure base.
The economic conservatives were in charge of the daring ventures that produced economic growth. The traditionalists were in charge of establishing the secure base — a society in which families are intact, self-discipline is the rule, children are secure and government provides a subtle hand.
Ronald Reagan embodied both sides of this fusion, and George W. Bush tried to recreate it with his compassionate conservatism. But that effort was doomed because in the ensuing years, conservatism changed.
In the polarized political conflict with liberalism, shrinking government has become the organizing conservative principle. Economic conservatives have the money and the institutions. They have taken control. Traditional conservatism has gone into eclipse. These days, speakers at Republican gatherings almost always use the language of market conservatism — getting government off our backs, enhancing economic freedom. Even Mitt Romney, who subscribes to a faith that knows a lot about social capital, relies exclusively on the language of market conservatism.
It's not so much that today's Republican politicians reject traditional, one-nation conservatism. They don't even know it exists. There are few people on the conservative side who'd be willing to raise taxes on the affluent to fund mobility programs for the working class. There are very few willing to use government to actively intervene in chaotic neighborhoods, even when 40 percent of American kids are born out of wedlock. There are very few Republicans who protest against a House Republican budget proposal that cuts domestic discretionary spending to absurdly low levels.
The results have been unfortunate. Since they no longer speak in the language of social order, Republicans have very little to offer the less educated half of this country. Republicans have very little to say to Hispanic voters, who often come from cultures that place high value on communal solidarity.
Republicans repeat formulas — government support equals dependency — that make sense according to free-market ideology, but oversimplify the real world. Republicans like Romney often rely on an economic language that seems corporate and alien to people who do not define themselves in economic terms. No wonder Romney has trouble relating.
Some people blame bad campaign managers for Romney's underperforming campaign, but the problem is deeper. Conservatism has lost the balance between economic and traditional conservatism. The Republican Party has abandoned half of its intellectual ammunition. It appeals to people as potential business owners, but not as parents, neighbors and citizens.
HERSHEY, Pa. - If you thought Farm Aid went the way of the Sony Walkman or the Grateful Dead, you weren't in Chocolate Town USA on Saturday, when 30,000 people turned HersheyPark Stadium into an organic oasis celebrating the family farm and the healthy food movement - not to mention homegrown American music.
Now in its 27th year, the all-star benefit concert, started by country-music legend Willie Nelson to help farmers survive the mid-1980s foreclosure crisis, is still going strong.
No longer a one-day event, Farm Aid has evolved into a national organization promoting the interests of family farmers.
The event returned to Pennsylvania, where agriculture remains the number-one industry, for only the second time in its run.
In 2002, Farm Aid was held in Burgettstown, west of Pittsburgh. This time the location was just a few miles from Lancaster County, which is about to make national history when it hits the milestone of 100,000 acres of preserved farmland. Lancaster boasts soil so rich it's known as the breadbasket of the East.
The first-ever Farm Aid concert drew 54 bands and 78,000 to Champaign, Ill.; Farm Aid is smaller now, with just under a dozen artists drawing 30,000.
Still, Farm Aid has brought in $40 million to benefit farmers and build relationships between consumers and those who produce their food.
"It's a good event that hopefully will open people's eyes to the fact farmers keep the country moving and they need help," said Teri Michelson of Linglestown. She paused to talk during a tour of Homegrown Village, an area featuring booths showcasing sustainable agriculture methods and environmental advocacy groups.
The healthy food movement has indeed grown (Pennsylvania has 600 certified organic farms, the sixth highest in the nation), spawning a record number of farm markets and encouraging industrywide shifts to organic farming methods. But the problems facing small farmers - such as fluctuating milk prices, tighter regulations, and access to distribution networks - are no less acute, organizers say.
"There is still danger for farmers," said Farm Aid spokeswoman Jennifer Fahy, pointing to the drought that ravaged crops in two-thirds of the United States this year. "They are gamblers every time they put seed in ground."
The musicians - the lineup included the 79-year-old Nelson, Dave Matthews, Kenny Chesney, Neil Young, John Mellencamp, and Jack Johnson - used the spotlight to target agribusiness interests. They said corporate farming wields too much power in Congress, where members last week failed to pass a comprehensive Farm Bill before leaving town.
Before the festival opened, Nelson told hundreds of fans and reporters he was "sorry to have to be here."
"This problem should have been solved years ago," he said.
Despite the problems, according to a 2007 survey, the number of farmers grew for the first time in decades, attracting a more diverse cross section, many working farms of just a few acres, Fahy said.
The atmosphere in the patchouli-scented Homegrown Village had an odd time-warp quality: young people wearing T-shirts paying homage to past rock stars like Janis Joplin, who died before they were born, mixing with the in-your-face activism of the anti-gas drilling "fracktivists" - a term that wasn't even in the lexicon when Farm Aid started.
Fahy said some people she called "Farm Heads" come every year, from all 50 states.
There was a booth dedicated to the "anti-sludge" cause - those who oppose spreading municipal waste on farmland - and other booths where folks could learn about genetically modified organisms (GMOs), rotational grazing, and biogas energy.
Even the concession cups and plates were compostable. Those who put their eating utensils in the wrong bin were swiftly corrected.
Bryan Snyder, executive director of the Pennsylvania Association for Sustainable Agriculture, said the state has a strong farming tradition among the booming Amish and Mennonite populations, which has helped give the next generation of farmers an opportunity to work the land.
"We're ahead because we are behind," he said. "We still have the infrastructure. You can drive 20 minutes from here and see what America used to look like."
Exhibitor Deb Brubaker, 30, of Mifflintown, is still working her family farm northwest of Harrisburg, as her Mennonite ancestors did.
She and her family run Village Acres Farm, which supplies organic fruit and vegetables to farm markets in Washington and to residents of the State College area, who buy their farm products through a subscription.
Brubaker, who was demonstrating a bicycle-powered grain mill her father put together for the festival, said she was pleased that such an event shines a spotlight on a challenging way of life.
HERSHEY, Pa. - If you thought Farm Aid went the way of the Sony Walkman or the Grateful Dead, you weren't in Chocolate Town USA on Saturday, when 30,000 people turned HersheyPark Stadium into an organic oasis celebrating the family farm and the healthy food movement - not to mention homegrown American music.
In 2002, Farm Aid was held in Burgettstown, west of Pittsburgh. This time the location was just a few miles from Lancaster County, which is about to make national history when it hits the milestone of 100,000 acres of preserved farmland. Lancaster boasts soil so rich it's known as the breadbasket of the East.
The first-ever Farm Aid concert drew 54 bands and 78,000 to Champaign, Ill.; Farm Aid is smaller now, with just under a dozen artists drawing 30,000.
Still, Farm Aid has brought in $40 million to benefit farmers and build relationships between consumers and those who produce their food.
"It's a good event that hopefully will open people's eyes to the fact farmers keep the country moving and they need help," said Teri Michelson of Linglestown. She paused to talk during a tour of Homegrown Village, an area featuring booths showcasing sustainable agriculture methods and environmental advocacy groups.
The healthy food movement has indeed grown (Pennsylvania has 600 certified organic farms, the sixth highest in the nation), spawning a record number of farm markets and encouraging industrywide shifts to organic farming methods. But the problems facing small farmers - such as fluctuating milk prices, tighter regulations, and access to distribution networks - are no less acute, organizers say.
"There is still danger for farmers," said Farm Aid spokeswoman Jennifer Fahy, pointing to the drought that ravaged crops in two-thirds of the United States this year. "They are gamblers every time they put seed in ground."
Most people I've asked say they've worked for a micro-manager. Their frustration shows when they talk about the person who drained joy from their career and under-utilized their skills.
You're a micro-manager if you:
See insights from Facebook contributors: Leadership Freak Coffee Shop.
What qualities do micro-managers possess?
What impact do micro-managers have on individuals, teams, and/or organizations?
Tags: Leadership Development, organizational success
This entry was posted on September 23, 2012 at 4:00 am and is filed under Managing, Personal Growth, Taking others higher. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
The Times has recently published a few features that we consider gifts to English teachers everywhere, including a summer "How To" section of the Sunday Book Review, and a new series, called "Draft," on the art of writing, which features essays by grammarians, historians, linguists, journalists, novelists and others.
Below, we collect some "rules" we've derived from these features and from other pieces on the Times site, along with links and related activities we hope writers at any stage will find fun or useful — or both.
Before you go, please note Rule 10, in which we ask for your writing advice.
Rule 1: Listen to the Voice Inside Your Head
In a post for Draft, Verilyn Klinkenborg notes that he is often asked what his "writing process" is. "My answer is simple: I think patiently, trying out sentences in my head," he writes.
He advises student writers to do the same, in contrast to school-writing, in which students are "asked repeatedly to write papers that are inherently insincere exercises in rearranging things they've read or been told." (Or, we have to add, are school exercises masquerading as sincere personal essays, such as the one spoofed in this Onion classic.)
Mr. Klinkenborg advises, "Before you learn to write well, to trust yourself as a writer, you will have to learn to be patient in the presence of your own thoughts."
You almost surely have a voice inside your head. At present, it's an untrained voice. It natters along quite happily, constructing delayed ripostes and hypothetical conversations. Why not give it something useful to do? Memorize some poetry or prose, nothing too arcane. A rhythmic kind of writing works best, something that sounds almost spoken. Then play those passages over and over again in your memory.
Try Mr. Klinkenborg's suggestions and see what happens. And if you'd like to record the voice in your head, or some of the sentences you begin to experiment with, try keeping a journal. The Personal Tech section of The Times reports this week that you can now do that via phone apps, without the "inconvenience of paper."
Rule 2: Learn From the Masters
A classic Times series, "Writers on Writing," asked contemporary writers from André Aciman to Hilma Wolitzer to talk about their work.
Glean insight from authors like Jamaica Kinkaid on why she writes; Allegra Goodman on calming the inner critic; and Carl Hiaasen on scrounging for material in newspaper headlines.
What are your favorite bits of advice? Copy them out for future inspiration.
Rule 3: Read Like Writers
To learn "How to Write Great," immerse yourself in great literature, which, according to writer Roger Rosenblatt, can be anything from "Harold and the Purple Crayon" ("the lessons of the 'Odyssey,' minus the sex") to "The Great Gatsby" ("Jay Gatsby, who stood straight and sober in the drunken Twenties, and who, nutty as his yearnings may have been, really was great").
What books do you admire most? Why? As Mr. Rosenblatt does in this essay, you might try writing a paragraph describing what you find important and enduring about a book or author, whether your choice is an official classic on everyone's list or an overlooked gem you think others should read.
Rule 4: Review the Rules
In his hilarious "How To Write," Colson Whitehead plays with shopworn advice that will be familiar to many student-writers. For instance:
Rule No. 1: Show and Tell. Most people say, "Show, don't tell," but I stand by Show and Tell, because when writers put their work out into the world, they're like kids bringing their broken unicorns and chewed-up teddy bears into class in the sad hope that someone else will love them as much as they do. "And what do you have for us today, Marcy?" "A penetrating psychological study of a young med student who receives disturbing news from a former lover." "How marvelous! Timmy, what are you holding there?" "It's a Calvinoesque romp through an unnamed metropolis much like New York, narrated by an armadillo." "Such imagination!" Show and Tell, followed by a good nap.
Before you read the rest of Mr. Whitehead's rules, you might brainstorm, alone or in a group, your own "Rules for Writing" — derived from what you've learned in school, from "real" writers, from your own experience, or from anywhere else. When you're finished, consider:
Then, read the rest of Mr. Whitehead's essay, and compare the two lists. What did you learn about writing from his piece that you didn't know before?
Or, use his list as a model, and create a list of rules that spoof the advice on, or the clichés about, a topic you know well.
Rule 5: Study Sentences
In "My Life's Sentences," Jhumpa Lahiri writes:
In college, I used to underline sentences that struck me, that made me look up from the page. They were not necessarily the same sentences the professors pointed out, which would turn up for further explication on an exam. I noted them for their clarity, their rhythm, their beauty and their enchantment. For surely it is a magical thing for a handful of words, artfully arranged, to stop time. To conjure a place, a person, a situation, in all its specificity and dimensions. To affect us and alter us, as profoundly as real people and things do.
Sentences matter. In fact, Constance Hale notes that sentences can even act as miniature narratives. As Hale does, you might collect your own examples of great sentences that are mini-narratives.
Ms. Hale also explores the "Sentences of the Masters" to demonstrate the different effects of short and long sentences:
Gabriel GarcÃa Márquez writes unhurried sentences that almost defy parsing. William Faulkner wrote a nearly 1,300-word sentence that ended up in Guinness World Records, but he used the five words "My mother is a fish" as a complete chapter of a book. Joan Didion can stop us short with simple truths, and she can take us on strolls down labyrinthine corridors.
Look for examples of interesting sentence structure and sentence variety in a work you are studying or reading, then write your own "copy-change" versions, in which you borrow another author's structure and use it to create your own piece.
You might also consider excerpts from children's book to review sound literary devices and explore the music that sentences make.
Rule 6: Write With Non-Zombie Nouns and Verbs
Delve into Strunk and White's fourth style reminder "Write with nouns and verbs" by reading about what Karen Sword calls "Zombie Nouns":
Nouns formed from other parts of speech are called nominalizations. Academics love them; so do lawyers, bureaucrats and business writers. I call them "zombie nouns" because they cannibalize active verbs, suck the lifeblood from adjectives and substitute abstract entities for human beings.
Fight those nasty zombie nouns with vivacious verbs.
And to consider tricky questions like "Do verbs have to be in the active voice?" and "When is the passive voice useful?" use the rules and examples in this post by Constance Hale.
Rule 7: Punctuate That Thought
In a post on exclamation points, Ben Yagoda writes
Habitual e-mailers, texters and posters convey quite precise nuances through punctuation, which is after all one of the points of punctuation. A friend's 12-year-old daughter once said that in her view, a single exclamation point is fine, as is three, but never two. My friend asked her where this rule came from and the girl said, "Nowhere. It's just something you learn."
Look through e-mails and texts you've sent for examples of "precise nuances" you've conveyed through punctuation. What "rules," like the exclamation-point rule cited above, do you think govern the use of punctuation in forms of communication like texts and I.M.'s?
How might an older generation less fluent in these methods get the unwritten rules wrong? (Teachers: sites like When Parents Text might be useful here, but please consider whether it is appropriate for your students first.)
Here are some punctuation marks to consider:
Exclamation points
Use Mr. Yagoda's post to examine and appreciate the role of the exclamation point in a sentence, then track exclamation points you see in "the wild"— in texts, e-mail, advertising, literature, or anywhere else. How do audience and purpose help determine when and why an exclamation point might be necessary or desirable?
Periods
Mr. Yagoda's post also alludes to the use of the period in the Obama "Forward." Slogan and what it suggests. What, exactly, does that period tell readers? What about the period the band Fun. has in its name?
Semicolons
Semicolons mystify many. In Semicolons: A Love Story Ben Dolnick recalls
When I was a teenager, newly fixated on becoming a writer, I came across a piece of advice from Kurt Vonnegut that affected me like an ice cube down the back of my shirt. "Do not use semicolons," he said. "They are transvestite hermaphrodites representing absolutely nothing. All they do is show you've been to college."
While Vonnegut's admonition may be harsh, Mr. Dolnick offers a good primer to using semicolons sparingly and eloquently, helping them understand the comma-period hybrid as writers and readers, which is useful, as one never knows where one might pop up.
Commas
Correct comma placement matters. Just ask Grandma:
Let's eat, Grandma!
Let's eat Grandma!
Use the Draft post "Fanfare for the Comma Man" as a jumping off point to examine comma use in a book you are currently reading. Copy sentences which include commas and use them to deduce the rules for proper comma use.
Then, turn to this post to check the accuracy of the comma rules you've come up with and check that your writers are following the rules.
Rule 8: Nobody's Perfect
Yes, Times writers and editors do make mistakes and the in-house feature "After Deadline," which the public can view, too, takes them to task by highlighting and correcting errors in grammar, usage and style that appear in print.
Use this blog to understand grammatical points, like subject verb agreement. Then, become a better editor of your own work by taking the After Deadline Quiz.
Rule 9: Fail
Learn from your mistakes and failures, a topic Augusten Burroughs tackles in
"How to Write How-To":
… to pass along the knowledge of how to succeed, first you must know how to fail. A great deal, if possible. This is essential because it's far more common (and easier) to make mistakes than to enjoy success. Being aware of potential points of derailment helps to better and more accurately navigate your readers past your own missteps so they can succeed where perhaps you first failed quite miserably.
Value mistakes, and the successes that grow from them, by keeping a portfolio of your work, including revisions and editing exercises. You might even reflect in writing on how your writing has progressed, or create a timeline of your development as a writer to see, laid out chronologically, how you've grown from as a writer over time.
Rule 10: Fill in the Blank
What would you add? Why? We invite you to tell us below.
Common Core E.L.A. Anchor Standards, 6-12
Reading
1. Read closely to determine what the text says explicitly and to make logical inferences from it; cite specific textual evidence when writing or speaking to support conclusions drawn from the text.
4. Interpret words and phrases as they are used in a text, including determining technical, connotative and figurative meanings, and analyze how specific word choices shape meaning or tone.
5. Analyze the structure of texts, including how specific sentences, paragraphs and larger parts of the text (for example, a section, chapter, scene or stanza) relate to each other and the whole.
6. Assess how point of view or purpose shapes the content and style of a text.
10. Read and comprehend complex literary and informational texts independently and proficiently.
Writing
4. Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organization and style are appropriate to task, purpose and audience.
5. Develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising, editing, rewriting or trying a new approach.
10. Write routinely over extended time frames (time for research, reflection and revision) and shorter time frames (a single sitting or a day or two) for a range of tasks, purposes and audiences.
Speaking and Listening
1. Prepare for and participate effectively in a range of conversations and collaborations with diverse partners, building on others' ideas and expressing their own clearly and persuasively.
2. Integrate and evaluate information presented in diverse media and formats, including visually, quantitatively and orally.
Language
1. Demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar and usage when writing or speaking.
2. Demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English capitalization, punctuation and spelling when writing.
3. Apply knowledge of language to understand how language functions in different contexts, to make effective choices for meaning or style, and to comprehend more fully when reading or listening.
A little over a year ago, I wrote a post called Three Signs Your Slide Deck Stinks. I think it got the most comments in the history of this blog as I invited readers to share their pet peeves from presentation land.
The Slide Deck Stinks post comes to mind because I've attended a lot of presentations lately. While I've heard some great ones, I'm sorry to say that there have been some bad ones too. In an age when practically everyone has a source of endless distractions (the smart phone) at their fingertips, it's easier than ever to lose your audience in two minutes or less. I've seen a lot of presenters do exactly that.
You probably have your own list of things presenters do that cause you to check out. I encourage you to share them in the comments so we can all learn from each other (or at least enjoy a good rant.) If I was writing an open letter to anyone who has to present (which I guess I am actually), here are three things I would beg them to avoid if they don't want to lose me and the rest of the audience:
Expect Me to Just Listen for 45 Minutes Straight: Please structure your presentation so you get me and the rest of the audience involved in the first two minutes and then give us something else new to do about every eight to ten minutes after that. Please don't expect me to listen to fact after fact for 45 minutes or more without checking out. Ask us a question that requires a response or show of hands. Show a relevant (but short) video. Give us a simple exercise to do with a neighbor that illustrates your points. Ask us to jot down a few thoughts and share them with each other. Almost everyone these days has ADD. Work with that by mixing things up.
Talk in a Monotone: I don't expect cartwheels and handstands, but please bring some energy to your presentation. Above all else, please drop the monotone delivery. It literally puts us to sleep.Vary your pace. Use some inflection. Raise your volume. Lower your volume. When you're practicing your presentation (and I hope you are) record yourself and play it back. I'll bet you'll be surprised by how flat the delivery is. Dial up the energy. Most presenters (myself included) can't dial it up too much.
Take Yourself So Damn Seriously: Some of you presenters are so serious up there that you're scaring me. Let's get real; most presentations are not about life and death topics so let's not act like they are. Pretend you're having a conversation with a bunch of friends. (It certainly worked for Bill Clinton at the Democratic National Convention.) Laugh a little. Smile.Connect with us.
OK, if you were writing your own letter to presenters what would you ask them to do to engage you or absolutely avoid so they don't lose you? Please share in the comments.
In 1980, about 30 percent of Americans received some form of government benefits. Today, as Nicholas Eberstadt of the American Enterprise Institute has pointed out, about 49 percent do.
In 1960, government transfers to individuals totaled $24 billion. By 2010, that total was 100 times as large. Even after adjusting for inflation, entitlement transfers to individuals have grown by more than 700 percent over the last 50 years. This spending surge, Eberstadt notes, has increased faster under Republican administrations than Democratic ones.
There are sensible conclusions to be drawn from these facts. You could say that the entitlement state is growing at an unsustainable rate and will bankrupt the country. You could also say that America is spending way too much on health care for the elderly and way too little on young families and investments in the future.
But these are not the sensible arguments that Mitt Romney made at a fund-raiser earlier this year. Romney, who criticizes President Obama for dividing the nation, divided the nation into two groups: the makers and the moochers. Forty-seven percent of the country, he said, are people "who are dependent upon government, who believe they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to take care of them, who believe they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it."
This comment suggests a few things. First, it suggests that he really doesn't know much about the country he inhabits. Who are these freeloaders? Is it the Iraq war veteran who goes to the V.A.? Is it the student getting a loan to go to college? Is it the retiree on Social Security or Medicare?
It suggests that Romney doesn't know much about the culture of America. Yes, the entitlement state has expanded, but America remains one of the hardest-working nations on earth. Americans work longer hours than just about anyone else. Americans believe in work more than almost any other people. Ninety-two percent say that hard work is the key to success, according to a 2009 Pew Research Survey.
It says that Romney doesn't know much about the political culture. Americans haven't become childlike worshipers of big government. On the contrary, trust in government has declined. The number of people who think government spending promotes social mobility has fallen.
The people who receive the disproportionate share of government spending are not big-government lovers. They are Republicans. They are senior citizens. They are white men with high school degrees. As Bill Galston of the Brookings Institution has noted, the people who have benefited from the entitlements explosion are middle-class workers, more so than the dependent poor.
Romney's comments also reveal that he has lost any sense of the social compact. In 1987, during Ronald Reagan's second term, 62 percent of Republicans believed that the government has a responsibility to help those who can't help themselves. Now, according to the Pew Research Center, only 40 percent of Republicans believe that.
The Republican Party, and apparently Mitt Romney, too, has shifted over toward a much more hyperindividualistic and atomistic social view — from the Reaganesque language of common citizenship to the libertarian language of makers and takers. There's no way the country will trust the Republican Party to reform the welfare state if that party doesn't have a basic commitment to provide a safety net for those who suffer for no fault of their own.
The final thing the comment suggests is that Romney knows nothing about ambition and motivation. The formula he sketches is this: People who are forced to make it on their own have drive. People who receive benefits have dependency.
But, of course, no middle-class parent acts as if this is true. Middle-class parents don't deprive their children of benefits so they can learn to struggle on their own. They shower benefits on their children to give them more opportunities — so they can play travel sports, go on foreign trips and develop more skills.
People are motivated when they feel competent. They are motivated when they have more opportunities. Ambition is fired by possibility, not by deprivation, as a tour through the world's poorest regions makes clear.
Sure, there are some government programs that cultivate patterns of dependency in some people. I'd put federal disability payments and unemployment insurance in this category. But, as a description of America today, Romney's comment is a country-club fantasy. It's what self-satisfied millionaires say to each other. It reinforces every negative view people have about Romney.
Personally, I think he's a kind, decent man who says stupid things because he is pretending to be something he is not — some sort of cartoonish government-hater. But it scarcely matters. He's running a depressingly inept presidential campaign. Mr. Romney, your entitlement reform ideas are essential, but when will the incompetence stop?
Frank Bruni is off today.