Men (and women) of influence—Part 2.

“A very large share of the rancor of political and social strife arises either from sheer misunderstanding by one section, or by one class, of another, or else from the fact that the two sections, or two classes, are so cut off from each other that neither appreciates the other’s passions, prejudices, and, indeed, point of view, while they are both entirely ignorant of their community of feeling as regards the essentials of manhood and humanity.”–Theodore Roosevelt

One thing that my recent vacation reminded me is of our responsibility as stewards of what we are given.  I would encourage any who might believe that the disparity of wealth is evil to reconsider. Without financial wealth, we would not have the schools, museums, and cultural centers we have. The problem lies not in the wealth. The problem lies in the hearts of those who hold it. The problem does not lie in privilege. Theodore Roosevelt, of course, came from privilege, but he was also taught responsibility. Andrew Carnegie came from nothing, but he was taught the value of hard work and education. Both of these men taught that we all play a role in the success of our society. Neither believed in handouts, but they believed in and offered a hand up.

Arguments about entitlement and privilege abound.  There is an old adage that suggests when you give a man a fish you feed him for a day; if you teach a man to fish and you will feed him for a lifetime.  It is my humble opinion that the likes of Carnegie and Roosevelt did all that they could to teach us to fish. In proposing his “Square Deal”

, Roosevelt stood having the rules changed “so as to work for a more substantial equality of opportunity and of reward for equally good service”.  Two key objectives are presented here: opportunity and effort.  He expected a fair wage for workers, but he also expected that those who are able would work for their wage.  Likewise, Carnegie believed in work.  Both men, I believe, sought to create opportunity.  We seem to have forgotten the example of these and other great men and women of their time.  We seem to want, as Dire Straits sang, our “money for nothing.”  We ought to want to work and earn our way, and those with the means should want to help.

To give to charity, today, is often to offer the fish.  Few seem to want to put their success to helping others succeed.

I heard on the news this week of a state having to cut library funding because of revenue shortages.  This should not be the role of the government, per se.  Men like Carnegie and Roosevelt sought to create the means for anyone who is willing to be educated.  Carnegie knew that without a wealthy class with a sense of stewardship, there would be no libraries and museums to speak of.  One need only look at the post-World War II Germanys to see this played out.  It is rather certain that wealth and responsibility are an essential to the growth and success of our Republic.  One without the other is likely to fail.  Wealth without responsibility has concern only for itself.  Responsibility without the means may be well-intended, but inevitably allows sacrifice give way to self-preservation.  At best, one of modest means can contribute only a small amount to the benefit of his neighbor.  Thus, we often face unfortunate cuts to public libraries and education.

Central to the values I learned from these men and countless others is civic responsibility.  Remember when John F. Kennedy encouraged us to “ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country”?  I wonder sometimes the extent to which Civics is still taught in our schools.  I wonder the extent to which those of us who were taught these lessons in school still abide by them.  Sadly, we prefer to take what we can with little regard for others (I view this from the perspective of the Commons).  If, however, we are to be (extra)ordinary—to be persons of influence (and we can all influence our spheres)—we must be engaged in our communities, carry our own weight when we are able, and express what Theodore Roosevelt called “fellow feeling”.

“Surplus wealth is a sacred trust which its possessor is bound to administer in his lifetime for the good of the community.”—Andrew Carnegie

Image: https://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/03/e8/91/8b/carnegie-museum-of-art.jpg

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *