Monthly Archives: September 2023

by Reid Fitzsimons

Picture yourself 600 years ago in Europe. You are a prince, a feudal lord, part of the nobility and aristocracy, and GOD do you love it! The castle, the servants, the money and material wealth, the fear you instill in the peasantry: your omnipotence. On occasion you pillage, plunder, rape, and slaughter, but you’re not really troubled by it, because you are right with God. Sure, Jesus opposed everything you do, but no worry, you have an “in:” you can buy salvation from those who claim they can dispense it. A bag of gold or silver to the local bishop, and you’re good to go (to heaven, that is). This practice was called buying “indulgences.”

Back in the present, everything is pretty much the same. You are part of the wealthy elite, the aristocracy: perhaps a career politician, a corporate CEO, a high-level bureaucrat, college administrator, or media figure. Like your predecessors, you love the money and material wealth, the mansions, and the power and influence you wield. Hopefully you're not out slaughtering people, but you still pillage and plunder and steal from the peasantry, but in a more genteel way. You don’t care about God, but you do worship gods- your privilege, your wealth, and status above others; it’s what you live for, and will do anything to maintain. Maybe you’re not a complete sociopath and actually feel a little guilty, but you know you’re not going to change. So you created your own form of indulgences, and you call them Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, and the best thing is they don’t cost you anything. If you do lay out cash to buy indulgences, it’s with someone else’s money. To whom might you give other people’s money? To the modern day version of the corrupt establishment church- the profiteering elite of the race grievance industry.

2 Comments

by Reid Fitzsimons

From 1986 to 2001 I worked for the NY State Office of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities (OMRDD) as a medical practitioner (PA). This was at one of a number residential institutions scattered throughout NY, located in a fairly rural area as was common for such facilities. We had an in-house population of around 300, with people ranging from profoundly retarded requiring total care and often with severe medical co-morbidities, to mildly retarded, who were generally were able to talk, walk, and take care of their basic needs with supervision. It was a job to feel good about: society taking care of people who truly couldn’t take care of themselves.

With a few exceptions, the employees who interacted daily with our population were caring and competent, this being especially the direct care aides and the nurses; it can be a tough job, both physically and emotionally. Ultimately the facility was controlled by bureaucrats, and with all bureaucracies there were petty people lusting for petty power and involved in petty intrigue, but at the direct care level it wasn’t too hard to remain oblivious to such nonsense, at least for most of my time there.

The epitomic bureaucrat

Bureaucracies typically create their own jargon and euphemisms, which frequently change depending on the whims of rarely seen bureaucrats. When I first started in 1986 the people in our care were not called the historical name of “inmate,” nor were they called patients, but the designated word was “client.” I always thought this was a little silly because it implies a cognizant two-way relationship, but assumedly someone deemed it a humane, non-pejorative title, which was okay. Nevertheless. people with important positions felt compelled to change the wording, so over the years we used “individual we serve,” “service recipient,” “consumer,” and after I was gone I heard “colleague” was in vogue. To me the simple word “resident” would have been both accurate and polite, but it never entered the lexicon.