Attention Republicans: sweeping generalizations are not the 'name of the game'

Lately, some of the Republican candidates have managed to talk themselves into a hole concerning welfare and those living in poverty. Newt Gingrich, probably the most offensive on the subject, accused all poor people of not having the habit of “showing up on Monday,” implying that those living below the poverty line simply do not work as a result of laziness. He said, “Really poor children in really poor neighborhoods have no habits of working and have nobody around them who works.” 

Apparently, Gingrich has never heard of the “working poor.”  

Rick Santorum has also come under scrutiny for making an even more specific generalization. He said to an audience in Iowa that he didn’t “want to make black people’s lives better by giving them somebody else’s money. I want to give them the opportunity to go out and earn the money.” Maybe he was just tired and this was just a slip of the tongue, but even that doesn’t give him a good excuse for singling out the African American community, especially because they are not the only people receiving public assistance.  

You’ve probably heard this rhetoric too. You may even think like these men, but there’s a danger in making these types of sweeping generalizations. It’s possible they simply didn’t explain themselves well. Maybe, they do in fact realize that poverty is a much more complex beast, that it doesn’t only stem from laziness. I’m willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. But the fact that some cheer them for making these statements is frightening.  

Where has our humanity gone? Have we suddenly forgotten about middle-class men and women who have been laid off from jobs they’ve had for years, leaving them with meager unemployment while they search for a way to support their families? 

Are women and children fleeing abusive situations to be ignored? What about the elderly who can no longer work and have no one to care for them? Should we punish the college student with no family support who is trying to better him- or herself? What about the single mom working three jobs to support her kids? Would you call her lazy? Or how about the food service employees on this very campus who make your food every day and greet you with a smile? Did you know that they get laid off every summer and Christmas break, and that some of them can’t even receive unemployment because they haven’t been working here long enough?

This issue is personal. These are real human beings, and they should be treated as such. How dare anyone say these people are all just lazy and have no work ethic. Yes, there are plenty of people who abuse the system, but there are many who are embarrassed to have to use the system at all and some who go without simply because they fear the stigma that goes along with receiving public assistance.  

The current system is not perfect, but let’s be honest, no system ever is. Does it need reform? Always. Should there be more investigation into the people who receive assistance? Yeah, probably so. But scrutinizing the homeless and impoverished as a whole is not right. Period.  

And making blanket statements about their ethics and living habits is offensive. Solving the issue of poverty will take more than one blanket piece of legislation because there are so many factors involved, and the solution will never come through judgment and stereotypes. 

Megan Massey is a junior religious studies major from Mount Olive. Follow her on Twitter @megan_massey.