Busybodies

I object to busybodies, meddlers, and manipulators; I think most people do...or should. Now, I will attempt here to avoid any provocative political or ideological words, and I apologize, in advance, if I should fail to do so. I believe in freedom, personal liberty, with as little outside interference as can be arranged. I resent busybodies, however well meaning they may perceive themselves to be. I include those high-minded types who would fix things in our society, first because they readily, eagerly, and progressively interfere with my liberty and the liberties of my fellow citizens. Secondly, I object to them because I don't believe the problems of sin—and that is generally pretty much everything—can be fixed from the top down. I also object to those disingenuous phonies, wolves in sheep's clothing, who pretend to care about social ills but only seek to use them to gain money and power. They encourage and use the meddlers to reach their own selfish goals; naïve meddlers seem to be gullible enough to accept their promises, despite abundant evidence of their hypocrisy and dishonesty. Whether intended for good or ill, such strategies are a waste of effort, time, and money, and the ultimate price is freedom. In the end, the slide into oppression will be accompanied by a boatload of unintended consequences

We are beset in the United States and in many other places by often self-righteous types who foist upon us their agendas to solve various problems—real or perceived. They make promises, regardless of the absurdity of such promises—demonstrated so frequently in history by earlier promises, not kept but resulting in many unforeseen complications, which typically they refuse to acknowledge. Sometimes they work behind the scenes to achieve their goals, not bothering to announce their intentions because, of course, they know best. Often they simply demand more money must be spent or more draconian measures imposed to continue down a failed course that will only get us more lost. In the worst cases, the end result is tyranny, and the busybody fixers become power-crazy enforcers of what they consider the ultimate good. It is not unusual, at this point, for the fixers to become killers. Watch or listen to the rhetoric of some of today's American fixers, and you will hear clearly aggressive statements or actual violent actions proposed toward those who disagree or dare to oppose their unarguably good intentions, inarguable because they are quick to accuse and silence any opposition or disagreement! While I can accept the possibility of them being outrageous for effect or to be funny, the anger that often accompanies their words is simply frightening; their behavior leaves little room for doubt regarding what they'd really like to do. One aspect of the busybodies' point of view is: they are never wrong!

Busybodies are entirely different from true helpers. Helpers respect others' judgments and their right to make their own choices. Meddlers tend to believe that they know best and prefer to overrule or simply ignore what others think, feel, or want. The classic example is the intrusive mother-in-law who moves in and takes over. I include here even those well-meaning mothers who tend to do too much for their children, protecting them from any risk and every error. Only young children need nannies, but many work hard to convert ours into a nanny state style government. One only need to look to history to see where such efforts go. It doesn't matter the intent of those in charge. Humans cannot be forced by the state to become righteous. Power can break things, hurt people, and end their lives; power can never change a heart or truly control a mind. Even sheep cannot be herded; they must be led, and people are much more than sheep, despite their sometime bovine (sheep-like) qualities.

Of course, we can manipulate, propagandize, and medicate them. These actions do violence to liberty and to the souls of individuals but may fall short of actual physical violence. Most self-righteous busybodies usually prefer to avoid violence, but they don't handle having their idealistic goals being thwarted very well. Even good kings have had trouble with this, and many modern, centrally planned governments have ended up using violence when their people refused to accept their meddling. Just as bad, their good intentions—assuming the best for the sake of argument—have always failed. If a parent cannot ultimately control a child's life for its own good, then how could central planners manage to control the lives of millions of people effectively? Of course, if you think a parent can completely control a child, then you are probably a meddler at heart!

Many will understand the example of the two kinds of manager. One is the control-freak who tells every person on his “team” exactly what to do. On her team, no one takes the initiative; indeed, initiative may well be punished. Military discipline may be described in this way, and I do accept that the big view of the battle or the war may require it, much like a team sport requires a coach to direct the action. Even then, I have some doubts, but I lack the training and background to make a fair judgment.  The other kind of manager delegates; he gives those under him the freedom to do their job in the best way and to exercise their creativity to do it better, if possible. He provides goals and perhaps some guidelines, but prefers not to have them require or expect too much direction.

Business owners and managers do indeed have an interest in the success of the business whether it is measured in profit or some other measurable purpose. A non-profit may measure its success in the number of people helped, houses built or renovated, or pints of blood taken. Watch out for those who have intangible goals such as “to make the world a better place.” Better in what way? For whom will it be better? How will it be better? Such are very nice sounding goals, but how will they be achieved? For that matter, how will we know when they have done so? What is the measure of progress?

Non-specific, generic objectives are the realm of the busybody. On the flip side, they are also the stuff of everyday critics and judges, who make assessments in qualitative terms. I've heard them often from meddlers in church—immature, unspiritual, foolish. The problem isn't that maturity, spirituality, and wisdom are irrelevant, but they are not concretely measurable and therefore not suitable for making judgments. Even more common words like unloving and unkind are used to condemn, not really to build up or move forward. Clearly, in this context, a busybody doesn't need to be a ruler, talking head, university professor, or spokesperson for some social agency; a busybody can be one person who thinks he or she knows better than you how to “raise your kids,” do your job, or run your church. As a pastor, I was often bemused (and occasionally irritated) when untrained laymen told me how I should do my job. Their approach was remarkably different from the wise old saint who never criticized but found gentle ways to open my eyes to see more clearly or to give me perspective to see my mistakes.

It is difficult for any fallible, let alone sinful, person to acknowledge error, give up a favored viewpoint that is wrong, or face their own weakness or ignorance. Busybodies excel in insulating themselves from correction or admission of error. Like the man who is lost but insists “This way will get us there eventually” (just as the stopped clock is correct twice a day), the busybody does not achieve his or her intended goal. In government, such courses involve the spending of money and then more money, with the belief that the failed and failing plan will eventually succeed if enough money is spent. I find this attitude especially regrettable in schools where the latest teaching fad simply doesn't work as well as longstanding, well-proven methods. Yet we hear over and over again that the problem in schools is insufficient funds. Another aspect of the busybodies' role in school failure is the substitution of discipline with various sociological notions.

I'm not sure which troubles me more, the relatively quiet busybody operating in the background or the loud, public voice demanding his or her meddling be adopted immediately regardless of the cost in dollars or personal freedom. We must watch out for both and stand solidly against them, refusing to be silenced, working hard to provide wise and cogent rebuttal, and exposing them for what they really are.