How a Walk in the Park Inspires Political Thought

Let me tell you a story.

The other day I went for a walk in the woods. I was carrying my son. We were hiking in a local, but privately owned park. The snow crunched under my snowshoes as I pointed out different types of trees and plants. My son isn't old enough to understand, but something did catch his attention. He pointed as a man with a dog came down the path to us. As the man made to pass, I spoke.

“Sir,” I said, “Did you see the sign the owners of the sanctuary installed?”

He stopped, uncertain, for normally conversation in the park is limited to an echo of hellos.

“The sign asks that we no longer bring dogs,” I continued.

“The sign says dogs aren't allowed because people don't clean up after their pets. I clean up after mine.”

“I am certain that is true,” I said, “but the sign doesn't say, 'dogs are allowed only for those who clean up after them'. It says that until further notice, no dogs are allowed in the sanctuary.”

“I might have missed the sign. It's rude to accuse me of an offense I didn't intend to commit.”

“Even before that sign, there was another sign that said all dogs must be leashed. I notice yours is not.”

“He has never bitten anyone in the ten years I've owned him.”

“That may be true, but it does not relate to what the sign says.”

“I don't agree with how you've characterized the situation,” he said, “and I won't answer anymore.”

That's when he stopped speaking to me, yet he stood: unable to withdraw, bound by a perverse desire to see where the conversation would lead.

“Sir, are you upset when others break rules they shouldn't? You are not sure what I mean. For example, have you seen others cross the street when they should not? Or they drive through a yellow light that just turned red? I see you nod in-spite of yourself. Do not be embarrassed to admit how you feel, for I feel as you. Are these the same as what you have done today? Some would say no, for in the first two examples, the negligence of the actor could cause bodily harm. Do not forget that these are just two examples. Maybe you have seen someone park in a place that they shouldn't. It causes no harm, but is against the law. Perhaps this is comparative to your act.”

I paused, but I could tell he didn't agree with the conclusion.

“You still do not believe so. Those were laws, but the sign is an arbitrary rule, created by bureaucrats: no elected officials and no votes. That may be true. So I ask, are you a believer in the right to property? I mean, does a man have the right to do what he likes with the land he owns. You are a sensible person, and of course you do. And here we are, upon the property of another. It is open for our use, but it need not be. A similar example would be of someone claiming their child is younger than is true, to obtain a cheaper entrance ticket to an amusement park. Still not the same you say? One includes deception and a theft, but the other, bringing your dog does neither of these. But there are places that ask you not to bring something in to prevent damage. The United States Capital requires that you leave food and water outside. This is to prevent damage to the exhibits. This example is exactly comparable to yours. For though you clean up your dog, you are not allowed to bring it, just as those who do not spill water are not allowed to enter the capital building with it.”

Then the man shrugged, turned and walked away. I knew I would see him and his dog again.

…

What does it all mean, and how does it relate to politics? Its a conversation about victimization. Wait! Don't leave yet. I understand you. You feel like a victim. You're nodding your head. Well, I few of you aren't. What I really mean is that most of us feel like victims. This is because: 1) most of us break little, stupid rules and laws 2) we are upset when others break different little rules.

Like the man and the dog, I break simple rules for selfish reasons. I justify it by poor rationalizations, that ultimately rest on the idea that I am being unfairly persecuted. I am also irrationally irritated by others who ignore rules. I construct a narrative for why the person is the way they are, and why they deserve to be punished for the small infraction. Both of these actions that I take are wrong. Neither is helpful.

At all times, but especially this year during the elections, the concept of victimization is crucial to review. Some politicians appeal to our sense of victimization explicitly, while others do subtly. When we approach the ballot box we need to consider our true state. Are we really being victimized? Each of us is a valuable part of a complex society where we receive benefits. Sometimes we are unfairly inconvenienced, but are these the result of true injustice, or accidental failure of the law? Even if there are injustices embedded in law, consider the benefits of your position. There are citizens that are unjustly deprived of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but are our problems upon this level, or only a small cost to aid the domestic tranquility of the country. For the upcoming primaries, and the general election after, consider this when you vote.

Can I best aid these United States of America by being a victim, or seeking a new birth of justice and equality for all?

Note: In case you are worried for my sanity, the entire story about the dog is false – except for my desire to have this conversation with people who are breaking this rule in the park. But I politely bottle that inclination inside myself.