By Emory Layne
(‘Charlie Brown’ is a registered trademark of King Features Syndicate, created by Charles M. Schulz.)
What is community pride?
First, let’s look at what it isn’t.
It’s not signs at the borders, nor a “Welcome to North Plainfie–” sign in the center of town. Signs come from having a message and the money to make one, private money or public taxpayer money.
Community pride isn’t necessarily claiming pride in the high school you attended. Far too many people forget that when you get your diploma, the social structure of high school ends. Far too many people still think that having been a star jock in high school, or captain of the cheerleaders, or class president, or being voted “Most Popular” provides some kind of portfolio for future social and community interaction. They seem to miss that many North Plainfield residents went to high school in other towns, and they couldn’t care less.
Above all, community pride is not a two-word phrase to be tossed out when convenient. Far too many politicians are ‘proud’ of their community, yet somehow can’t seem to find a community resident to fill those high-paying, high-power jobs in town. They can’t bring themselves to have their kids in the town’s educational system, preferring private schools.
And their current actions belie this alleged pride, because they can’t seem to see the things going on right in front of their face that are not things to be proud of.
Beware the proud politician surrounded by the same people for years and years; the community he or she is proud to be a member of ain’t necessarily a geographic entity.
Defining community pride is similar defining “love” in a way that would be accepted around the world: difficult to do. But a discerning eye can begin to tell what it is and isn’t with basic, common sense observation.
For instance:
Which people have pride in their community’s school system?
- Is it the parents who move through the system demanding changes that, in a series of amazing coincidences, are changes their children want or need?
- Or is it the people who have a personal political or social agenda they just know is the only correct one, because everyone else isn’t as in-touch and brilliant as them, and participate in the system only to make sure such an agenda takes hold?
- Is it the person who works with their kid’s school because help is needed?
- Is it the person who never ends up as the President of this or the Chairperson of that, who never makes a speech before an event, but who puts in the time and effort when only the kids (the only truly important participants) know?
- Is it the person who believes in helping kids learn the skills they’ll need to prepare for productive, satisfying lives, and leaves politics to the home?
Which people have pride in their community’s youth sports?
- Is it the people who are tremendously active and involved – but only as long as their kids are the pitcher, the quarterback, or the point guard?
- Is it the people whose ‘pride’ in the program magically disappears when their children are no longer able to avail themselves of its benefits?
- Or is it the person who continues to coach long after his or her kids have grown and progressed … or simply lost interest?
- Is it the person who works with the youngest kids, where there aren’t big trophies and regional championships?
- Is it the person who willingly works with the less talented kids, even though he or she knows there’s no possibility of shiny hardware with such children on the team?
Which people are the civil servants with the most community pride?
- Is it the person who holds a position for years and years, and after a while, develops a personal belief system as to what he or she is “owed” and justifies questionable actions through it?
- Is it the person who equates their longevity with their intelligence or skill, as if the two are necessarily related?
- Is it the person who sees new, perhaps less experienced people as outsiders unworthy of basic decency?
- Or is it the person who looks at each day of employment as a day that calls for a good day’s work for their pay?
- Is it the person who does what’s needed even when there’s absolutely no bonus, no overtime, and no promise of future consideration?
- Is it the person who often ends up at the end of the buck pass, but still does what’s needed?
The best definition for community pride, I think, is that it’s like true class or true bravery.
“Having class” or “being brave” is not a designation you can assign yourself, no matter how many people try to.
You must be designated as classy or brave by others.
And the only way other people can decide those questions is by watching how you act in different situations. Anyone can appear classy when they’re calling the shots; anyone can look brave when they’ve already identified and eliminated the risks.
“Community pride” can be as simple as cleaning up an area simply because it needs cleaning, without issuing a press release or getting your picture in the paper doing it.
Or, it can be as difficult as the public servant who sacrifices a long-term (ahem) “friendship” because he or she discovers the friend is ripping off the taxpayers – the other members of the community.
It seems like pitching in or doing the right thing when there’s absolutely NO reward, no benefit, and hardly anyone to notice has taken on a “sucker” connotation in the 21st century.
But nothing could be further from the truth.
No community, of course, is perfect. Each has its flaws, its minor potholes and Grand Canyons. And people aren’t perfect either – though I realize that, to some folks around here, that’s a blasphemous statement if directed at them. People come in all shapes and sizes, colors and languages, interests and abilities.
But there’s something every last one of these people has, regardless of the ubiquitous race, color or creed: something to offer, and the time to offer it.
Does anyone out there besides me shake their head when someone claims that they “don’t have time” to help out because they work 80 hours a week at their management position?
There are people who work 80 hours a week cleaning houses, stocking shelves and whatever other non-management work they do, surviving, and they still find some time, even if only a small window here and there, to pitch in.
Are we supposed to accept that someone’s busy-ness with making more, more, more money precludes being a decent member of the community?
Yet politicians always make a far bigger deal when a filthy rich person donates a tiny portion of their stash to a community – the pols name things after the donors, make a huge to-do about it. Meanwhile, the people who truly make sacrifices to be there for the community end up picking up the trash after the ceremony.
Everyone has something to offer, and everyone can find some time to offer it.
The key is whether it’s a conditional offer – “What do I get? What’s my compensation? ‘Cause I’m not doing a damn thing until I know there’s something in it for me that my ego demands!”
For years, I’ve heard big shots in North Plainfield bemoan the lack of people willing to get involved. Borough Hall calls for more participation. Recreation claims a shortage of coaches and officials. The schools say the parents aren’t doing their jobs.
There’s an explanation for this phenomenon. And, to a person, those same officials have avoided recognizing this explanation as if it were radioactive.
I’ll explain by way of historical analogy. For decades, the Federal Bureau of Investigation did not pursue organized crime solely because Director J. Edgar Hoover believed there was no mafia. He made a determination, and to a huge, powerful organization, that determination became reality, because he called the shots.
Here in North Plainfield, there is no dearth of people with skills, interest and willingness to pitch in for North Plainfield.
None.
The reality is that the same people who have been running everything for so long have made it next to impossible to participate.
When there’s a hurricane coming, sensible organizers don’t ask for your references before they let you fill sandbags.
But in North Plainfield, you practically need to be a “made man” (or woman) to even be allowed to take part in the process. People have been running departments and programs for 12 years, 20 years, 30 years – the word “fiefdom” comes to mind.
To those wringing their hands over the lack of community pride they perceive in North Plainfield -you’ve chased away far more people than you’ve welcomed over the years with your “my way or the highway” approach. Your fault. Not the volunteers’ fault.
I’ve pondered this, and reached some conclusions. (Maybe these conclusions are wrong, but they could be right.)
Ego seems to be a very valuable asset in the business world, but completely counterproductive to results in a community. Too many egos around here – too much effort expended on jockeying for position and attention instead of just doing what needs to be done.
Too many examples of two extremes.
On the one extreme, we have people who say:
“I’ve always done it this way, dammit, and no one’s going to tell me to do it differently.”
On the other extreme, we have people who say:
“I say we should do this differently. Never mind that there’s nothing wrong with the way it is or that the only person who thinks it should change is me. I’m ME, and I say (for whatever bogus reason provided) it has to be done!”
The trait common to both is the gag factor. No one ever has to say:
“I’m sorry. I was wrong.”
CHANGE WILL LEAD TO CHANGE.
I believe in this firmly. The foundation has (finally) been laid in North Plainfield for an erosion of secrecy, back room agreements and insider deals. It makes no sense to continue looking to the people who’ve used these anti-democratic approaches for their entire public service careers to implement and develop positive change.
And I’m not talking about “change for change’s sake.”
If new people are given the opportunity, and, taking the half-empty glass POV, they act just like the last bunch, at least we now have the means in place to address this openly and call them to task.
In other words, it can’t get worse.
But it can get better.
Look at who’s doing as opposed to who’s not. I think it makes the decision a piece of cake.
