By Jerry "Clapso" Avissato
April 17, 2000
Official Digger of the MVCC Campus
I would like to start my usual ramblings with what I hope will come to be called Avissato's Law, which states: Problems are solved in such a way as to always create new problems. A clear case in point would be my recent rant, Avissato (2000) in which I contend that cars are a problem. It should be obvious how a temporal cultural analysis would offer insight into this subject. I will start with a definition of my concept of Temporal Culture: That is, simply, that culture has a time element. The culture of a group or location changes over time. These changes can take place because someone perceives a problem and attempts to solve it i.e. Daimler invents the internal combustion engine to improve the transportation of his day. This is where Avissato's law comes in. Daimler's solution to the transportation problems of the late 19th century became the problem of the early 21st century. For most of the 20th century, the automobile was considered a symbol of progress. For many of us in the early 21st century, this is still true. I do not see cars as such. I wrote of my thoughts on cars in Avissato (2000).
At some point, these changes then become a matter of public policy. In my stated example of cars, the socioeconomic power structure jumped on the automobile bandwagon in a big way. This happened in the early 20th century. The automobile industry was formed. Using the advertising techniques of that time they convinced people their lives would be better if they owned a car. The growth of car ownership then created the need for better roads. In a purely market driven economy we would have thrown up our collective hands and waited for market forces to create roads. That is, demand for roads would have lead entrepreneurs to build them and profit from their use. Did this happen? No. Why not? Simple, we live in a mixed economy. The ramblings of the political right wing not withstanding, we don't live in a market driven economy. We live under what some, including myself, term Lemon Socialism. This is a system in which the costs and risks are borne by the society (socialized) while the profits and wealth are gained by the powerful (privatized). This feeds on itself in that as more and more wealth becomes concentrated in fewer and fewer hands, the few hands become more and more powerful and can then funnel more and more wealth to themselves. This in turn leads to the further concentration of power which Michaels (1949 orig. 1911) described as "the iron law of oligarchy". What do we, the common people of this society get in return for this? We get to the rugged individual myth thrown in our faces. This is the idea that if we were "better" in some way, we would gain status and wealth too. We are lesser people, under the terms of this myth, because we don't have.
How does all this effect me? That is what I try, these days, to write about. How I'm effected by all this. That can best be explained by writing about my recent attempt to procure funds for food and shelter from the welfare system. I went down to the office on the first floor of 500 Park Avenue here in Utica, New York. I had with me the required forms, which I had filled out, and in one case had my landlord fill out, as well as a letter from my doctor explaining that I am disabled and incapable of gainful employment. I was subjected to a 10-minuet "orientation" which didn't apply to my particular case but was "required by the state."
This was the first, but by no means the last example of what Merton (1968) described as Bureaucratic Ritualism: a preoccupation with rules and regulations to the point of thwarting an organizations goals. I was given two forms to return by a given date. Upon my return to the office with my two forms, I was told that the form filled out by my landlord was not complete, and I would have to get another one filled out. I explained that I had been waiting over a week for food stamps and could they give me some as I was out of food. I was told that I would not get any until the required paperwork was completed. I explained that I was hungry NOW. I would not be able to wait until the required paperwork was completed. The bureaucrat shrugged and explained "we have our rules."
This is a classic example of Bureaucratic Ritualism. The purpose of the welfare office should be to provide food and shelter to people who don't have them. Instead, the bureaucracy now has, as it's primary purpose, the generation of paperwork. The goal of helping the needy is secondary to the rules and regulations. I have refused to take any further part in this system. The system has deemed me unworthy of food and shelter and as such I am now not only hungry (I haven't eaten in two days) but I stand a chance of being homeless when the rent comes due in two weeks.
I would rather be hungry and homeless then put up with the dehumanization associated with the welfare office. This brings me to another point. How could the bureaucrat I spoke with at the office not feel for a hungry human being? There I was, standing right in front of him saying I was hungry. All he could see was the required paperwork. What so desensitizes a bureaucrat to the point that all human compassion disappears? I will coin a new term for this: Bureaucratic Disconnect, which is the tendency that the rules and regulations protect the bureaucrat from the consequences of the bureaucrat's personal actions in the course of bureaucratic duties. That is, that the bureaucrat is just as dehumanized as the "client." No human considerations apply in an interaction with a bureaucrat. The bureaucrat is armored against feeling any connection to the client by the rules and regulations. This is what Weber (1978) described as Alienation: the tendency of bureaucracies to turn the worker into "a small cog in a ceaselessly moving mechanism." In my case, having refused to follow the bureaucracy's rigid rules and regulations, I am deemed unworthy of food and shelter. Is this what we want of our system? Do we want to refuse help to those in need because of purely structural elements in the design of our system? The other possible explanation is that the system is purposely designed to dissuade the needy from seeking such help. The basic premise is that then only the truly needy will be desperate enough to stay in the system, if they manage to get in at all. The present environment of "welfare reform" adds another layer of dissuasion to the system. Additional programs such as the local "pride in work" add an element of forced employment to the system. Work or starve is now the choice many face. Unable to motivate some members of society with the conventional appeals to greed and want, we now have in place punishment for the poor. How dare they be poor in this, the land of opportunity! Get out and work in any kind of sweatshop! You are not worth anything as a human being unless you work!
I offer this small paper as an example of the kind or work I now do. If it meets with the approval that some of my other writing has, I offer it as proof of another strange concept of mine Qualitative Elitism: The idea that one's work is subject to review based on one's status in a given group. By this I mean, for instance, that there seems to be an under current of thought that says that only through the rigors of the academy can a persons work become of high enough quality to be worthy of publication.
I've heard rumors that some have suggested that my work is very close to publishable quality. I now ask that anyone reading this work explain how this work, or perhaps my work in general, is lacking in such quality. The last criticism I heard was that I didn't use enough APA citations to support my work. I have added such to my last couple of works (I just held my nose and did it) and look forward to the next piece of the puzzle.
I feel at this point that I can't continue to attempt to motivate myself with what Macionis (1992) calls Anticipatory Socialization, social learning directed toward gaining a desired position. I find myself completely unable to see what position I hope to achieve. I don't want to commit several years of my life to the school of salesmanship, and then spend the rest of my productive days as a Chia Pet salesman. I feel completely isolated from what I see as a system out of touch with who I am. I need to hear from others what my work can be used for. Without such feedback, I am floundering in a sea of ideas with no sight of land. The island I seek may be Utopia. Since that is the Latin word for nowhere, I seem to be lost.
Read, Think, Speak, Write, Be!
References:
Avissato, Jerry (2000) Zooming Around in Two-Ton Death Traps: Free Thyself Oh Caged Beast! Utica, NY: Unpublished
Michaels, Robert (1949 orig. 1911) Political Parties. Glencoe, Ill: Free Press
Merton, Robert K. (1968) Social Theory and Social Structure New York: Free Press
Weber, Max (1978) Economy and Society. G. Roth and C.Wittich, eds. Berkeley: University of California Press
Macionis, John J. (1992) Society the Basics 4th ed. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall