When Government Gets Petty

Instapundit recently carried a couple of stories out of the UK that should give every American pause.  If our government continues on its current course, which is towards the same model we see in Europe, we will set loose a tyranny of “Karens,” and I don’t think we want to live there.

The first story is a column from noted, and wealthy, British media personality Jeremy Clarkson.  Clarkson’s latest adventure is a reality show om Amazon Prime called “Clarkson’s Farm.”  It is among the most successful shows produced and distributed by that outlet.  As it has developed, one of its overarching themes has been troubles with local regulators and Clarkson’s plans to develop his property.  That local regulators should have a say in Clarkson’s activities is reasonable.  His media fame means his activities attract massive crowds on small roads in rural England.  That has to be handled authoritatively.  The problem recounted in the column Instapundit quotes is that the regulators are quite fickle and decisions are easily subject to modification.  Clarkson points out that he employs around 300 people and they cannot be assured they will have work the next day because someone, somewhere may make a decision that shuts a given enterprise down.  We’ll come back to this in a minute.

The second story Instapundit carries is about a YouTube personality whose daughter has set up a cafe’ for her stuffed animals complete with Monopoly money changing hands.  This individual was subject to an inspection by local authority because a complaint had indicated they were operating an actual, functioning business.  The key thing to note here is “complaint.”

It should be noted, and I am sure regular viewers of “Clarkson’s Farm” have so noted, that much of the fickleness that’s prevents Clarkson from being able to promise his employees regular employment flows from “complaints.”  Decisions are made and then reversed or rescinded because someone decides they are not happy with that decision.

See what I mean about a tyranny of “Karens”?  You cannot please everyone, ever.  That’s the lesson for the various planners and regulators involved in these stories.   Governing sometimes means saying “no” and sticking to it – telling a complainant to “get off.”  If you think it would never happen here, you have never lived where there is a homeowners association.

But it does happen on a larger scale in this nation when “charitable” organizations decide an issue demands action and set about to change regulations or regulatory rulings.  They are able to organize and focus on public comment periods, appeals, and so forth to command the attention of an agency in a way the regulated community simply cannot  That’s all these organizations do, the regulated community on the other hand have businesses to run and a limited capacity to bear overhead costs like filing appeals or sending an army of commenters to a public hearing.  “Karens” can be an organization just as much as a petty individual.

And I think the word “petty” is key here.  Petty – “marked by or reflective of narrow interests and sympathies.”  In other words – selfish – unwilling to understand the others perspective.  Funny how the Bible always seems to have something to say on virtually any subject.  I this case, James’ letter – “For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there is disorder and every evil thing.”  Order and decency demand that we understand the others perspective.

When government tries to adjudicate between the petty interests of people and organizations you will have the sort of regulatory waffling and life intrusions chronicled in the post that started all of this.  But there is little else a government can do when confronted with so many passionate opinions.  If you do not want to live like this, then learn to “live and let live.” Choose compassion over passion.  Maybe “Love your neighbor as yourself.”