Richard Bircher lives in Lebanon.

That our local taxes have risen this year is not the primary jest of this essay, though this increase, along with the previous ones, is certainly of concern.

Surely, any full-fledged adult recognizes the necessary presence of the public sphere, and much, though not necessarily all, of its undertakings. Just how each of us perceives our relationship to this public body to be, and to what extent they choose to separate or distance themselves from such body, is very much an individual matter.

A person’s degree of governing sociability, group attachment, as well as their overall, fundamental conceptions pertaining to the specific body politic they choose to live within, is based on any number of factors, nearly all being internal (i.e. their own very individualized and very unique world view that develops with the unhurried, self-satisfying, mastery of maturing.)

Is there a group of absolute equals within the entirety of society that we as individuals should be striving to imitate through governing practices? Or is there a varying state of equality/inequality that by its very nature reflects the scheme and order of the natural universe, essentially denying the existence of equality and equity as absolutes, and where any social construct of equality attacks the individual’s right to free will and self-determination, consequently keeping him and his respective society at bay, as well as at odds?

A strong sense of self-responsibility greatly enhances the development of group responsibility, but not vice versa. It’s way too easy to rest confidently within the group’s sense of virtuous convictions, passing around a variety of catchy slogans and self-validating flattery, while perceiving those outside the clique in a most derogatory, dumbish fashion, paving a path bent more on furthering condemnation and ideological warfare, rather than seeking a reflective interpretation and acknowledgment of reasoning quite alien to one’s own.

This understanding of another’s beliefs is by no means an endorsement thereof. The intent is to forgo the overwrought pursuit of the social cohesion notion that parties, political especially, and organizations in general, pretend for us to believe are obtainable real-world objectives. That any substantial number of people are a mutually unified unit requires an overwhelming degree of like thinking and similar life experiences. This simply is not to be. Each of our histories is highly stylized and unique. And each of us shall create our own synthesized version of history, its heroes and villains, while residing outside of society’s traditional classrooms, more so than within, as we see fit to venture beyond the bearing and ideological boundaries of its established institutions.

Naturally, we prefer to believe our personal actions and beliefs are based upon intelligible truths and observable facts, and that we, along with any group we may participate within, possess therefore, a moral prerogative to pursue and even impose our will upon the outside world, primarily through political and educational institutions. A proselytizing of virtue as we believe virtue to be.

Article continues after...

Yesterday's Most Read Articles

Neighboring landowner objection stalls Steeplegate redevelopment approval

As N.H. coal-fired plants shift to solar, offshore wind beckons

Body of long-missing hiker found, pinned by boulder in Dry River

Baseball: Undermanned, Belmont battles against one of the state’s top pitchers

UNH seeks vandal who accused university of genocide in spray-painted message

UNH Faculty Senate calls on university to investigate police response to protest

Your Daily Puzzles

Cross|Word

Flipart

Typeshift

SpellTower

Really Bad Chess

The very concept of government and the act of governing represent the trade-off between factions, many factions. Regarded simply as: good, bad, right, wrong, weak, strong, all depending upon one’s subjective assessments. That humans all possess a common reference point of virtue, necessity, personal idiosyncrasies, and perceptions, is certainly not the case. How much of anything is too much or too little? We live in an arena of continual tug of war: more government, less government; spend more, spend less. How do we see ourselves in this overall societal arrangement? And equally important, how do we see others in this very same realm? Are we assisting, or are we enabling the individuals within the community according to government directives and governing policies?

Those persons with a more group-inclined, familial perception of social order, appear to rank high on emphasizing empathy towards groups and not necessarily individuals. One scenario of abuse, or privilege, fits everyone within the group. Whereas those who are less responsive to group affiliation are likely to evaluate persons and situations more on a one-at-a-time basis, believing social class action suits are largely a matter of convenient oversight and group pressures, thereby becoming suspect of intent and integrity. Pity coupled with guilt, versus a realistic deposition by the aggrieved, along with those associated factors of equal impact positioned outside of the claimants’ immediate sphere of immersion.

Just what measures cohesion? What matching percentage of a particular population is required in order to lay claim to a dominating consensus therein? The variables are so numerous that any collaboration of like minds is likely more a matter of one faction being able to successfully coordinate their efforts within the overall public domain, so as to gain elective office with literally a very small number of actual voters participating.

Local elections are an excellent example. In general, approximately 10-15% of eligible voters do in fact vote. Regardless of the number who do turn out, a victory is a victory, representing a legitimate exercise in representing, or more likely, governing the citizenry. An intermarriage of well-mannered, classic democratic intent with the various cabals of opposing, determined, wishful moralists seeking political leverage over the many vagaries harbored by those setting outside the circle of this dominant social/political order.

Any notion of social cohesion is inexact and mostly mythical. Considerable variations, both of a modest nature as well as extreme, regarding people’s life perceptions, philosophies, expectations, levels of acceptance and tolerance are more the norm rather than the exception. I personally feel little, if any, concern, nor regret, that factions within our society, long since founded by an American-styled republicanism, do in fact exist. To believe that there is a sort of universal guiding light leading us upwards, or downwards, inherent within a secular society is largely unfounded.

Individuals and societies are always in motion, and this motion creates the future, welcomed or not. A future tied to both the powers and passions of the moment, along with an uncertain trust in a guiding, prevailing faction not of our own design.