Altruism has its limits for darn near everyone.
All you have to do is send someone some money that they desperately need, and you discover that within weeks. You get put on lists of very nice people who are willing to part with some of their money for children, mostly, but also adults, who usually live a long way off (but sometimes don't, as in the Milwaukee Rescue Mission), and don't have the daily benefits of clean water, decent food, and more clothing than they have on their backs.
You also get put onto the lists of people who have a soft spot for abused or needlessly slaughtered animals. Some of this stuff gets put on TV, too. In case you lose touch or something, you get to see live pictures of people and other beings who will soon be dead if you don't help.
Sounds cynical, I know. But these things exist, so I occasionally give them money. I don't have a lot, but once the pocketbook is opened, all kinds of organizations send me mail in solicitation that I didn't ask for. You can't call it 'junk' mail. But it gets overwhelming, especially this time of year, when it's assumed that you're more in a giving mood than you are, say, in March.
I haven't counted, but I should count the number of mail solicitations I receive each month. Some have a nickel or three pennies or even a dime glued with that goop they send it with, that you can and should peel off before you put the extra paper (on which there is usually an angst-filled message written) into the recycle bin. I have a rule: If you send me change, I will open the envelope. Triage Part I.
If I have given to you before, I will likely give to you again, but not every month or every time you ask me: Triage, Part II. I do not fill out the form, usually on the back, which gives out my debit card number so I can become their monthly bank. Nope. Won't do that. I realize that my name and address gets put on a different list, so I tolerate increased frequency.
The organization often checks and circles the second amount in from the left, hinting that if you gave that much, it would really, really help; $18 instead of $10, for instance. Or they would remind you that if you gave that much, you would receive (another!) tote bag. Some allow a box to check to say that no, after that bribe, you're not interested in getting one.
And calendars! You get calendars! I don't have that many walls in my dwelling! Another bribe--if I'm getting a calendar, surely I have ten or fifteen bucks to give them.
It's people like me, though, who become intolerant faster. We don't have the kind of money to give every month. Rich people do, and much like us, probably give just enough so they don't become unduly uncomfortable. I have a heart and a soul and I do recognize the need. But I'm not going to keep food off my table. Their limits have larger numbers, that's all.
It's a trick that Republicans continue to play on us. They say that charities will make up for the extra taxes people don't like paying to others who need the help. Otherwise, that's socialism, they say, though it really isn't. It's just making sure the safety net's big enough so that we don't have people wandering the streets.
Just don't ask them for too much money. That's against their rights. Don't cover them with guilt. Let it be spread around evenly.
Underneath all of this are also political agendas. There are many with liberal bents: I should say that. The American Legion is a good example, too. I got a missive from them with an agenda-laden survey about what would otherwise appear to be (to them) automatically responsive topics.
How did I get something from the American Legion, you might ask, since I never served in the military? Probably because I have contributed and still contribute to organizations like the Wounded Warriors Project (which has recently gotten up on TV). And that's because Congress, in some of its deepest hypocrisy and cynicism, doesn't sufficiently take care of badly wounded veterans.
I don't think many of the most recent wars we've fought have been necessary, but fight them we did and are, and these people need our help. I consider it charitable and a form of payback.
I didn't necessarily consider it patriotic, but they did, and there's value in respecting that. Besides, they've lost limbs and parts of their skulls and their talking ability and things like that, and especially if you think that the wars were a waste of time, they constitute additional wastes of lives. And that is incredibly sad. Hate the war, love the warrior.
But mail solicitation doesn't require nuance, so it's apparently assumed that if you give to the WWP, you're probably inclined to support the American Legion. And, if you support the American Legion, you are likely to support a number of conservative or reactionary causes.
So when the American Legion sent me a knee-jerk survey, designed to make them feel better about their automatic support of 45, well, I answered it. But they didn't get the answers they were figuring.
The first question they ask is about burning the flag. It's always the first question. Because didn't they fight for the flag? Well, no, they didn't. They fought for what flag represents, which are things that people talk about but don't necessarily respect.
The possible answers are "yes" and "no". There's no "not sure" there. It's as if this is no place to be wishy-washy, okay? Who are you, anyhow?
Of course you're going to be against it, right? But, hush my mouth, I didn't say so. I said that people really should have the right to burn a flag.
It's the purest expression of democracy. If I can do that as an expression of speech, if I can make fun of the flag or express my feelings about the hypocrisy of what it stands for, I might get a reaction or start a conversation. Not only that, but I might also get a conversation I didn't plan for, from people who think that that's a bad idea, that I'm out of my mind, that I'm defeating the purpose by doing so.
Or maybe that's exactly what I want because those are the people I'm planning on reaching. Nevertheless, let me ask you: How often are flags burned? It's usually done in some public place. Isn't that usually reported in the news? I watch the news pretty often. I haven't seen a flag-burning in months and months. Is there much of a threat in that?
People get confused. They think that destroying the flag destroys democracy. Not true. Destroying the chance to destroy the flag destroys democracy. What it destroys is someone's idea of patriotism, but not necessarily mine. I can love my country, or at least the idea of it, enough to be critical enough of it to burn a flag because I'm so pissed that it's the only thing left to do to get somebody's attention that we have problems out there.
I'm not inclined to do so because I don't think it works. But I reserve the right to. If that ever gets shut down, then other protests will, too. Democracy would take a big, big hit.
Besides, is that possibly worse than showing up at a state capitol with AR-15s, ready to do battle with a governor who just wants to protect the population from a pandemic? Burning a flag hurts no one, if you don't wander too close to it, but hurts some sensibilities. So what? Sticks and stones.
AR-15s kill people. AR-15s don't start discussions, they end them. AR-15s help no one and nothing.
Farther down the survey, of course, there's the what-do-you-think-of-the-president question, with 10 being the best and 1 being the worst. I created my own category, zero. I drew a circle next to it and filled it in. I'm quite sure that that's not what they were looking for.
The American Legion, though, should say something about 45's comment about soldiers as being "losers" and "suckers", not to mention depicting the late John McCain as not being a hero somehow because he was captured. That's about as bad a betrayal as can be. But there's nothing in any of the literature I received that brings that up.
The American Legion should be in front of the parade, campaigning against this horrible person. My Dad, who was on a destroyer escort in World War II, used to be an active member of the Legion. 45 called him a "loser" and a "sucker". Excuse me?
There are veterans who get this, who understand that the right to have discussions is basic in our society, if uncomfortable; that saying things loudly and strongly doesn't make them right, that the substance of the conversation is worth paying attention to. And that fighting for that is far more important. I would think that the American Legion is an embarrassment to them. I would think that they would either protest such stances or simply not join. Or maybe create their own group.
They might have consigned the contents to the recycling bin. Just in case, I spoke for them, in case they did. Part of the madness that threatens to consume us is due to automatic, knee-jerk reactions that, if someone took a moment to think about it, might cause a change of mind and heart.
I didn't use their address sticker that mail solicitations often insert when I sent in the survey. They have my name. They'll send something back, automatically, because I did. Someone may actually read it (postage paid; Triage, Part III). There wasn't a separate space to actually write something, though. Too bad. They would have gotten a big piece of my mind. I mean, it wasn't much of a counter protest, so they probably didn't really get it.
Instead, you get it, here. Thanks for reading.
Be well. Be careful. Wear a mask. With some luck, I'll see you down the road.
Mister Mark
No comments:
Post a Comment