Boundaries of a state

I’m still processing my separation from Samaritans and as I do, I keep thinking about the role the state has to play in the lives of people. Samaritans recently received federal funding as part of the 988 program - a national suicide helpline that works like 911. You can call it from anywhere and have someone to talk to. The fact that the organization persisted withouthte support of federal funding for as long as it did is truly an achievement. In the interim, I believe it did receive funds fromt eh Massachussetts state government and other organizations.

I went through a bit of a James C Scott phase a few years ago and absorbed everything that was written about these non-state societies. At the same time I was also on a bit of an Indian anthropology kick - mostly books my dad sent my way like The Remembered Village and Status and Sacredness. I didn’t realize it then but I was coming at those books with a question - how do things get done, and then keep getting done? How do you build something that continues to provide people a good life, that rescues the lost and feeds the hungry?

There was a nice Twitter thread recently on why the Indian government is so good at certain things like running free and fair elections, while it’s so bad at other things like education. The simple breakdown is that elections are one-time events while education is a continuous outcome. The difference in measurable outcome and third party observation means that it’s very hard to hold the state accountable. I’ll almost certainly have to research more into this before I come up with definitive conclusions, but I imagine that a lot of successful education systems in the world start from non-governmental efforts to create a place to dump kids who are not being helpful in the fields. Only once they’ve reached a certain size do they take the notice of the state and start serving the state’s purpose. The change had to come from bottom-up.

These non-governmental forces, which often start with just a bored individual with a lot of drive, are often quite powerful and can accomplish things far beyond what the state can do. An individual working without the blessing of the center can move more quickly and make more mistakes. They exist beyond the boundaries of the state - both in responsibility and power. Bill Gates joked about how he would never be interested in running for office because he has a far greater ability to influence positive outcomes as a wealthy citizen than within the gears of government.

But…how does one turn the desire to do a good thing into an institution? How do you keep it funded? Keep it going? America’s answer to this is the joint stock corporation. If you want to change something in America on an ongoing basis, you do it by starting a company. At least, that’s the mythos of our age. The reverence with which people speak about American companies, the fact that we wax poetic about a company culture and even study how differing corporate cultures create innovation reminds me a lot of the anthropology books I was obsessed with in an earlier life.

But…why do I want to create an institution? Because the world is so terribly broken - as I mentioned in my previous post, Samaritans reinforced my belief that we live in a world downstream of a lot of brokenness. If I was a Christian, I would say that we are all ‘born of sin’. There is no way for us to go back and undo the original sin - whether that is the slavery and colonialism that founded America or the knowledge of agriculture.

But…why is it my problem? This one I don’t have a good answer for. In the Enneagram personality test, I’m a Type 2 - a Helper. One who is so convinced that at their core they are unlovable that they go to great lengths to be of service to others, to finally feel they deserve love. I persist in a broken city, in a broken country, in a broken world. I don’t believe that anyone is coming to solve these problems - not the state, not some NGO, not me. Maybe that’s not OK. Maybe I’m OK with that for now.