This disillusionment need not be confined to the failure of government officials to deliver on their political promises. As I have already mentioned, we might find a lost sense of personal aspirations and opportunities. While declarations that “welfare moms” are pumping out babies to keep government money coming in are largely mythic, there is an unintended consequence of governmental support that hints at growing dependency and accompanying loss of vision. It is a systemic, “chicken-and-egg” dynamic—a “poverty cycle.” No jobs are available nor are adequate education and training available to those living in poverty. As a result, these men, women and families must rely on government support. With this support comes confirmation by the government that these victims of poverty are simply incapable of making a living (the assumption of personal inadequacy) or will never find a fulfilling (or even unfulfilling) job (the assumption of a life without opportunity). No need for education or training if people of poverty are inadequate or afforded no opportunity. The cycle of poverty is sustained and intensified (think system dynamics). As those identifying and describing the cycle of poverty have noted, the psychology of poverty (hopelessness and helplessness) might be even more difficult to overcome then the cycle. True freedom is nowhere to be found in either the psychology or cycle of poverty. Alarm signals should be sounded for those advocating a pure form of collective responsibility.
Conclusions
Hopefully, with the safeguards in place and the alarm signals clearly articulated, we can address the negative consequences of each option in a constructive manner. As a result, we might even be in a place to formulate an integrative policy regarding the handling of complex societal problems. We and our Estonian colleagues might be able to move toward true freedom in our respective societies. Optimally, this formulation could be thought through in a slow manner with broader, often counter-intuitive and systemic dynamics taken into consideration. Johnson’s polarity management would be joined with the wisdom of Forrester’s systems thinking and Kahneman’s slow thinking.
It is at this moment that we can pause and offer our gratitude to makers of analytic tools such as we have engaged in this essay. Rights and responsibilities must be balanced and integrated if true freedom is to be achieved. We soon must move beyond this analysis. We must bid farewell to our soul reliance on slow, systemic thinking and turn to planning and design. We must consider the nature of a society that must be created if rights and responsibilities are balanced and if we are to realize true freedom. We must invite citizens from Estonia and other countries in the world to join us in this adventurous enterprise. With this transition in mind, I move in my next essay to the quality of shared concerns and priorities (a “harmony” of interests) in a society of true freedom. Then, in the third essay, I explore ways in which this harmony of interest can be projected forward through formulation of and engagement with a compelling vision of the society’s future.
_____________________
