May 1, 2007

• Social Inequality and Philosophical Differences

  Zvanoizu said she was, “puzzled and outraged” about the 23.5 pairs of identical dirty socks:

  It’s a mindset so alien to me: that of shoplifting things like, wearing
  them but once, then just throwing them away. It’s like there’s some
  level that’s been sunk to that rationalizes the theft and tossing, and
  totally wipes out another segment of people who wait to buy those
  things, wear them for years and years and… urgh. I can’t explain it.

  I think I understand. 

  First, I want to repeat that I was guessing about how those worn-once-and-unwashed socks came to be discarded.  I really know very little about the people who threw out the clothing.  They also threw out a lot of housewares, appliances, toys, games, etc., that they had been unable to sell during weeks of a yard sale. 

  A few days ago, Greyfox noticed that they’d gone away and left the key stuck in the door.  He assumed that the landlord wasn’t aware that they’d gone, and told him.  Mike thanked Greyfox for telling him about the key, and gave him the okay to go in and salvage what he could from what they had left in the cabin.  We got dry beans, spices, pasta, baking mixes and other non-perishable foods that we can use.

  Theirs is not the way I would now handle such a situation, if I were in their shoes.  I would give stuff away to neighbors, or donate it to charity. But there was a time, when I was much younger, that I might have slipped quietly away as they did, afraid or ashamed to face the landlord and return his key, embarrassed to offer my meager leftovers to neighbors I barely knew.  Possibly their motives were similar to that.  It is also possible that simple narcissistic self-interest and disregard for others motivated them.  Who knows?

  Zvanoizu’s comment reminded me of a long car trip I took to Fairbanks with a fellow Mensan about thirty years ago.  There was an active local group in Anchorage and a scattering of isolated members in the Fairbanks area.  National Mensa asked the Anchorage LocSec to arrange a meeting of some of those isolated M’s and try to get them to organize a local group.  Two of us had the spare time.  Julie, an attorney, drove her car and we spent the first part of the trip getting to know each other better.

  After I mentioned my criminal history and prison record, the rest of our conversation centered on political philosophy and social psychology.  Julie was like Zvanoizu, puzzled and outraged.  In response to her direct question about what had motivated me to steal, I related the story of my poverty as a teenage single parent, and my political radicalization by the man who told me that I deserved much better than I had.  He taught me that, “Property is theft.”   He said that if someone with more than he needs has something I need but don’t have, it isn’t wrong to take it.

  Julie replied, “But what about the resentment of the people who work for what they have, towards those who steal?”  I countered with, “What about the resentment of those who work and work and still don’t have, toward the bosses who have plenty and continue to profit from the work of others?  What about the corrupt politicians and parasitic bureaucrats whose risks of detection are minimal and whose profits are enormous?”  It is an endless argument and one that cannot be won by either side in a system as full of inequities as ours is.  Many voices have been raised in favor of the god-fearing, law-abiding philosophical position, so I will state a few points on the other side.

  A few years ago, a British clergyman made news when he spoke out publicly against supermarkets for enticing people to steal.  He was censured by his church superiors, but many people agreed that the man had a valid point.  In Dickensian times, a street urchin might have pressed his nose against the sweet shop window and swooned at the fragrance that wafted out when the door opened, but he would not have been allowed within reach of the merchandise.

  Those who make their merchandise available to thieves are inciting to theft.  They purchase shrinkage insurance that minimizes their financial risk and that provides employment to actuaries, clerks, and insurance executives.  By installing security cameras and other antitheft devices, they are supporting technological industries, most of them in Asia.  By hiring security personnel, they are supporting the local economy.  Therefore, in their own way, thieves support the global economy.

  Among the folk heroes of our culture are a few thieves, such as Robin Hood, who robbed the rich and gave to the poor, and Pretty Boy Floyd, who robbed banks in the Dust Bowl of the Great Depression and paid off poor farmers’ mortgages to those same banks.  Even so, some people, even some thieves, are astonished to learn that there is such a thing as an ethical thief.  Of course, ethics are an individual thing and not all ethical thieves would agree on what that means.  To some, it might mean simply not stealing from one’s own friends and not getting caught.  Others only target large corporations with shrinkage insurance, never take more than they need (or donate their surplus to charity), don’t use violence, never carry a weapon in a burglary… as I said, ethics are variable.  

  Statistically, most thieves will readily steal money, supplies, or merchandise from their employers, take everything from towels to telephones and art from hotel rooms, and cheat on their taxes, but draw the line at shoplifting.  Those, the majority of thieves, responsible for a majority of the annual dollar loss to theft in the U.S., are middle class thieves or even upper class.  The people who steal clean clothes because they cannot afford to use a laundromat are, of course, in the lowest economic classes.  These are the ones with whom I can relate.

  Studies suggest that roughly a third of those on the bottom rung of society will steal something they need if the opportunity arises.  The rest will presumably beg or do without.  If the low-class thieves have a little bit of money, they will buy beans or hamburger.  If they are flat broke, they will steal steak or lobster.  If they have a little bit of money, they will launder their old clothes or buy “new” ones at a charity thrift shop such as Salvation Army or Goodwill.  If they are flat broke, they will try to steal something better.  Since the risk is essentially the same, it doesn’t make sense to steal cheap or inferior merchandise if one has access to something better.

  When I was homeless and penniless, I survived catch-as-catch-can.  Nearly everyone I see at Felony Flats is doing that.  Most of their lives, in the terms used by 12-step programs, are unmanageable.  Each of them copes in the way that he or she has learned.  Some of them are hardworking people going through hard times.  Others are mentally ill, and the fortunate among them have been diagnosed and are receiving some assistance.  It would be inaccurate and misleading to generalize too broadly about the people who live there.  The only thing they really have in common is that all of them are living in substandard housing in a harsh environment.

  I live in substandard housing in the same harsh environment, but I have the advantage of owning my squalid hovel, not paying rent.  In the years before Greyfox came along and began providing some money, we did without some things.  I grew some food in the garden and foraged for wild foods.  When Doug was a baby, he didn’t wear disposable diapers.  Often I could scrape up enough money for the laundromat.  When I couldn’t, I washed our clothes, including his diapers and my dirty handkerchiefs (tissues are a luxury), by hand.  That’s how my mother taught me to do things.  I have Scots ancestry on both sides of my family.  I was taught not to waste things.

  I am neither puzzled nor outraged at the waste involved in those shopping bags full of dirty socks, and the other serviceable clothing, usable items and perfectly good food Greyfox found in that dumpster.  I can easily guess at motivations, even if I cannot imagine myself doing something like that.  I can understand, even though I don’t condone waste.  Neither do I condemn anyone.  I don’t do outrage.  Waste appalls me, and by dumpster diving I do what I can to minimize it.  I don’t hesitate to scrounge and salvage more than I can use.  I figure there’s always someone who can use it.
  

  • 7:09 pm
  • 6 Comments