The Self, the State, and the American Experiment, Northwood, Ohio on Aug25, 2026

 The Self, the State, and the American Experiment

If you are intelligent, capable, and fortunate enough to be financially secure, you are more likely to believe in the importance of individual responsibility and self-reliance. If you have the means and the desire to produce a product or service that other people are willing to pay for, you are participating in capitalism. Capitalists are rewarded for providing goods and services that people want and need. In doing so, successful businesses create employment, encourage innovation, reduce economic instability, and provide opportunities for people to improve their lives.

In a capitalist society, consumers also have a powerful voice. They vote with every purchase. A poor product or service may eventually disappear because people stop buying it, while a useful and desirable product can thrive. Much of what we enjoy in America—from the iPhone and the humble number-two pencil to SpaceX and modern computing—has developed through private enterprise, competition, investment, and the desire to create something better.

Capitalism also depends on something deeper than money: the belief that tomorrow can be better than today. Many Americans work hard because they believe they can improve their circumstances. They may hope to own a home, buy a car, accumulate savings, build a business, or provide a better life for their children. Millions of Americans have achieved these goals. Their homes, families, savings, and possessions represent more than financial value; they represent years of work, sacrifice, risk, and personal responsibility.

There is, however, another legitimate role for government. Social programs can provide assistance to people who are poor, sick, elderly, disabled, unemployed, or temporarily unable to support themselves. I have personally benefited from government programs, including Social Security and unemployment benefits, as well as health care and tuition assistance through the VA. There is also a place for me in a veterans' home should I ever need it. I do not consider accepting assistance in times of need to be shameful. A civilized society should have compassion for people who genuinely need help.

The concern arises when assistance becomes permanent dependence or when government grows so large that it begins to substitute itself for individual responsibility. Programs such as SNAP, utility assistance, Section 8 housing, Medicaid, and other subsidies can be valuable safety nets, but they also require substantial public resources. The larger the government becomes, the greater the temptation for politicians to use these programs to expand their influence over people's lives.

That creates an important question: At what point does a safety net become a dependency?

Government does not normally create wealth in the same way a private business does. It collects taxes and redistributes resources or provides services according to political decisions. When resources become scarce, benefits can be reduced, eligibility can change, and political priorities can shift. Someone who has worked and paid taxes for decades may understandably question a system in which additional effort seems to produce diminishing personal rewards because more of the additional income is taxed or redistributed.

There is also a difference between owning something and renting it. An owner generally has a direct financial incentive to maintain and improve property because the consequences ultimately affect the owner's investment. A person who does not own the property may have less incentive to make long-term improvements. The same principle can apply more broadly: when people have little personal stake in an outcome, responsibility can become someone else's problem.

This does not mean that government is incapable of accomplishing useful things. It clearly can. Government has important responsibilities, including national defense, infrastructure, public safety, basic research, and assistance to citizens who cannot care for themselves. The issue is not whether government should exist, but how much responsibility should belong to government and how much should remain with the individual.

History also demonstrates that competition and private investment can be extraordinarily powerful forces for innovation. Smartphones, computers, commercial spaceflight, artificial intelligence, entertainment, pharmaceuticals, and countless other technologies have benefited from private competition and the possibility of financial reward. People take risks because they believe that success will allow them to keep some of the rewards of their effort.

That incentive matters.

A society in which the government attempts to control every major economic decision risks weakening the very motivation that produces innovation and prosperity. When success is heavily constrained and rewards are largely separated from effort, fewer people may be willing to take the risks necessary to create new businesses, technologies, and industries.

At the same time, capitalism itself requires limits and responsibilities. Markets can fail. Businesses can become abusive or monopolistic. People can become wealthy through exploitation rather than innovation. A free market therefore does not mean a market without laws, contracts, property rights, or accountability. The challenge is to protect individual freedom while preventing the powerful from abusing that freedom.

There is also a moral dimension to this debate. The desire to help the poor, sick, elderly, and vulnerable is not exclusively a political philosophy. Compassion, charity, and helping one's neighbor have deep roots in religious and moral traditions. The problem occurs when compassion becomes indistinguishable from government dependency, or when political leaders use people's legitimate needs to increase their own power.

The American ideal has historically rested on a tension between the individual and the collective. We need both. A nation cannot survive if everyone believes that someone else is responsible for their welfare. But neither can it remain strong if it abandons people who have fallen on hard times.

The goal, therefore, should not be to eliminate government or eliminate capitalism. It should be to maintain the proper balance between them.

Government should provide a safety net without becoming a permanent substitute for personal responsibility. Capitalism should reward work, innovation, investment, and risk-taking while operating within laws that protect people from abuse. Individuals should be encouraged to build, save, create, work, and take responsibility for their own lives whenever they are capable of doing so.

America works best when people believe that their future is not predetermined—that through effort, responsibility, opportunity, and sometimes a little luck, they can build something better.

The greatest danger is not helping someone who needs help. The greater danger is creating a system in which people eventually believe they cannot succeed without the government.

The American experiment depends on preserving the belief that the individual still has the power to shape his or her own future.