Funny what a post can do...

• The other day I put the following post on Facebook: 

   

  I heartily accept the motto, - "That government is best which governs least;" and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which I also believe, - "That government is best which governs not at all;" and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have.
  
  --Henry David Thoreau,
  "On the Duty of Civil Disobedience"

  This seemingly innocuous quote engendered quite a response from my "friends".   Two people "liked" the quote. 
  
  The first person who responded simply wrote "Amen." Now these three are somewhat different in their world views, although maybe not representing far ends of the American political spectrum.  To me, that illustrates the universal appeal of Henry David Thoreau and the very American affinity for Civil Disobedience.  It also highlights the American mistrust of government.  I feel it necessary to point out that, unless things have changed in the last couple weeks, all three of these persons have jobs, live in houses, have families, in other words, have something to lose and are not out overthrowing the government.
  
  What happened next is what is really interesting.  The next day a friend posted: "Wow, that sounds like something a rich person who "isolated" himself in the woods to do a lot of "deep thinking" would say."  I am not entirely certain, but that seems like a sarcastic (as opposed to satirical) comment.  The implication is that only a rich person who is an "academic" or has their head in the clouds would come to the conclusion that we do not need government.  I should point out this person also has a job and a family.  In fact, a corporate job.  A job which depends heavily on the government and government regulation if not subsidy.  So much so that they employ a full time lobbyist to watch out for laws and regulations that may have negative impacts and to try to have passed laws with positive impacts.  In other words, this person is entrenched in the very system Thoreau rejected.  
  
  But wait, it gets better.  
  
  The next person, who tens to like to think of herself as a nonconformist commented "But yet still had his mom cook his meals and do his laundry." 
  WHAT!?!  Where did THAT come from?  So Thoreau's comments on government are undermined by who does his laundry.  By the way, I have been to Walden Pond and I am pretty certain Thoreau cooked his own food and washed his own clothes while he lived there.  I am not even sure his mother was alive.  
  
  Next came an honest to goodness American Libertarian, or at least a Republican Libertarian (I am not certain about Republican or not):  "It's why Thoreu [sic] is my hero. I found 'Civil Disobedience' to be a treatist [sic] on libertarianism. So, I take it from the UU (Unitarian Universalist) camp here that we should excommunicate Thoreau?"  (I digress, but should explain that all three of the last comments were by member of the Unitarian Universalist Church.  I am also a member.  While I generally find organized religion to be the opiate of the masses, UUism runs in my Mother's side of the family, has seven principles that most people couldn't disagree with so my kid's learn good things and UUs generally participate in social justice activities I sympathize with.  Many UU's, if not all, call Henry David Thoreau one of the great father's of American Unitarianism because of his transcendentalist teachings.) 
  
  But don't worry, because things get weirder from here.  The next post was from a relative.  A hearty Republican businessman type.  He is older than me by 25 years and spent a lifetime working for corporate America.  More precisely, he worked for transnational corporate citizens.  He believes that "Christian" is a buzzword that identifies a way of thinking in the same way "conservative" is a buzzword for the religious right.  His comment was that he and his spouse "...heartily agree with [me] and H.D. Thoreau." 
  
  So we now have very liberal people agreeing with very right wing people that Thoreau was right and some very middle of the road liberal people arguing that Thoreau was wrong.  
  
  After a little "making up" by some of my friends (which is irrelevant here), it occurred to me what the greatest irony of all was.  I had chosen this quote from a website entitled Anarchist Theory FAQ Version 5.2,  http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/bcaplan/anarfaq.htm#part6.  
  
  So it appears that anarchy is popular with people who not only would not agree with it if they knew what they were agreeing to, but would most likely disagree with each other, if they knew what each other thought.  
  
  The lesson of the day is to tailor the message and the audience will follow.  I once told someone I did not care WHY someone did what I wanted, only that they did it.  And in 99.9% of the cases this is true.   Can a movement survive that no one even knows exists?  
  
  Apparently.
  
  
  Write a comment...