Those People, Matthew 6:2, and the advancement of my values at your expense

We need to help Those People. Those People are members of our community. Those People's children attend our schools. Those People (verb; you name it) with our children. We owe it to Those People to give them the opportunity for a better life.

I've heard these statements in discussions regarding a rather low-income neighborhood close to my home. The discussions have taken place both in my church and in my local city council chambers, and the differences in approach are stark:

My church has stepped out with multiple programs involving food distribution, ESL classes, job training skills, and direct investment into the community in the form of a playground and community center, not to mention VBS and counseling activities. Discussion at the church is pretty straightforward: "We have these resources set aside to do this. How can you help?" "Well, I can be here this day to do that."

The city has begun a grand plan for annexation; they're demonstrating their commitment to Those People by sending a) a dogcatcher to keep stray mutts from crapping in other people's yards and b) a code enforcement genius to ride around all day and measure grass (stroking citations when the green stuff is higher than the little line by the "10"). Discussion at the city involves the consumption of enough man-hours to clean up half the "blight" they seek to fix, and it's accompanied by much wailing, preaching about social responsibility, and vague emotional outbursts of "We have to do the right thing! And oh by the way, Those People affect our property values."

My church leaders want their membership to help needy people, because that's what Christians are commanded to do. They lead by example and ask me to follow. Their words precede action.

My city council and their cheerleaders, who for some reason happen to be in the real estate industry, pitch out a bunch of vague platitudes about helping Those Needy People. Their empty rhetoric focuses on the visible, superficial symptoms rather than on any root causes. By confiscating property (in the form of taxes), they want to force everyone in the city to finance the utopian vision of a few do-gooders who are unwilling to use their own resources. Their words precede orgies of back-patting, mutual admiration, and solemn recognition of their own altruism.

Admittedly, both parties have forgotten that no one forced Those People to live where they do or accept the circumstances in which they live. Both parties take it for granted that Those People's living arrangements are not what Those People want, even though many of Those People just want to be left alone. Recognition of those two facts would go a long way toward relieving a lot of self-inflicted burdens carried by the church and the city.

Even so, why have governments, even at the city level, gotten into the business of cleaning up yards on one side of town and propping up real estate values on the other? Why have logic, principles of limited government, and the notion of personal responsibility left all levels of political discourse as pure emotion takes their place? Why are Christians so maddeningly accepting of inefficient bureaucracies when Christians themselves can more effectively address root causes of problems in the community?

And then it comes back to me: Why have I allowed this to happen, and what will I do to turn it around?