Tending net : Socratic Rhythm Method

by Matt Barr

Tending net

I present this to you as possibly the best argument for basic social welfare services I've ever heard, one which would, let's say, for obvious reasons fail to resonate with the average American voter.

I was a goalie. At first, I thought my job was to stop shots. Then I realized it was actually to prevent goals — not quite the same thing. It was to stop shots, but it was also to keep as many shots from being taken as possible, by controlling rebounds, by helping my defence in yelling instructions to them, by making good passes.
Then I realized the job of the goalie was really something more. In a game, any game, in everything I did, it was my job to deliver a message to my teammates — that everything's OK back here. We're fine. Don't worry. Think about what you need to do, what you're so good at doing. Move the puck up the ice, drive to the net — score. Keep your mind, all of your mind, on the challenge of that.

My job, in fact, had an offensive purpose, not just a defensive one. It was to give confidence, to give the others the opportunity to go for it, to take a chance, to do the huge and difficult amount necessary to meet the challenge and succeed.

This isn't how we usually think about social understandings and social programs. We think of them as safety nets, something passive, just there, a protection for those too preoccupied with their own safety, who don't want to take chances. That rewards the wrong behaviour, that gets in the way of what we should be as individuals, and as a nation. But think about what a safety net really is. We imagine it most often in relation to the circus, to trapeze artists, who at great heights swing and leap from bar to bar a safety net beneath them. What would it be like if there was no safety net? Who would want to be a trapeze artist? How would they ever learn? And what would that first time even look like? What a safety net does really is encourage more people to try. To fall into the net, but then to get back up on that bar and try again. To learn. To improve. To become good at something. Do you think you can do a double flip off one bar, 40 feet in the air, and be caught by someone else the first time you try?

Without a safety net, you'd better be able to do it, and every time you try. But really, who'd ever get up there? How would anyone ever develop the talent, the skills? And in the future, would anyone try a triple? There's nothing passive, nothing defensive about a safety net. A safety net is an improver. An enabler. An instrument that encourages bigger and bigger ambitions. That allows you to take risks. That makes you better.

With luck, Canada's constitution empowers its national government to run programs like the one Dryden's talking about. Otherwise they'll have to do it extralegally and unaccountably and you'll never see the end of it.

Trackback Pings

Browse books from Amazon.com:
Canada social+programs

Comments

bujeeboo posted:

Excellent article, that.

It would fail to resonate with Americans because our history, our nature as Americans, and as leaders of many intellectual and technological endeavors in the world gives most average people a sense that we are so good at what we do, we don't need a safety net. Our religious history as well, in which we believe God will provide and sustain us, gives people the impression that a safety net is for that other poor sap. I don't need it, therefore it's a stupid idea. We are a young country and a youthful country, and our current generation has not lived through Depressions, epidemics, and the like. We all secretly think (which slowly evolves into hope on the denial continuum) that we will never be old and unhealthy because our culture values youth, vitality, sex appeal and vigor (and thinness, while I am at it). To our culture, old is equal to irrelevance. (Contrast that with Japan where old people are respected and revered and never left to languish in a home.) We don't have a very good recent history of recognizing simple truths about preventative medicine. Like, having poor dental care can lead to premature death. We don't see the value of funding something like that. We wait until the ship is sinking and then wonder where the lifeboats are.

Our parents were our very first safety net, and for many, that's the first place people run back to when they are in trouble and need help. God bless you if you have parents who can bail you out.

There isn't much difference between rich people in Canada buying better medical service like rich people in the US do. Money will get you better care in both places. The difference is, middle class people in this country with insurance usually get the same quality of care as a rich person. Middle class and poor people in Canada get a system that is often just average in quality. But poor people can get basic care in Canada, whereas poor uninsured people here get expensive ER here and we all pay for it. Health savings accounts, as an idea, won't help people who are uninsured in this country because they are simply poor. Our safety nets are becoming more and more selective as we try to offer solutions on how to fix them and that's what frustrates me th most. When politicians use the word "entitlements" and juxtapose it against deficit spent tax cuts, I just bristle.

(non-sequitur) Hey, did you know Liberals' brain scans look different from Conservatives'? So you see, I can't help myself. I have to bristle.

February 2, 2006 6:24 PM

MJB posted:

I was thinking more along the lines of it not resonating with Americans because nobody follows hockey.

February 3, 2006 9:13 AM

bujeeboo posted:

:o)

I just had a funny vision of Al Gore using the tending net analogy in 2000 instead of "lock box".

duh! But then you did say "for obvious reasons". I guess I got too celebratory over the fact that you were extolling the virtues of the safety net on yer blog.

February 4, 2006 9:12 PM

MJB posted:

How might Americans know Ken Dryden?

He's a six-time Stanley Cup champion and Hall of Famer. Ok, not really ringing a bell.

He's the author of the best book on hockey ever printed, The Game. I doubt anyone read it.

He was Al Michaels' color man during the Miracle on Ice game. There you go!

February 5, 2006 12:56 AM

Post a comment

Due to comment spam, please enter the five-digit security code along with your comment. I'm sorry for the hassle.



real quick liberty law blogs music movies sports supreme court constitution home