Obligations and favors

The thing about obligation is that one is obliged to do or give something for no reason other than debt, and debt is a purely capitalist -- not human, much less divine -- construct. A debtor usually does not love the person or corporation to whom he owes his money or his action -- how could he? He is constantly being reminded of his obligation, and no matter how willingly he assumed it, he is always inadequately and certainly grudgingly repaying it. If it's a mortgage he owes, and he's not making double payments, if he's barely scraping by, he is enriching the holder of the mortgage with usurious interest and thereby impoverishing himself and his family. No love lost there, and the triumph of the Last Payment Party is hardly one of reconciliation -- it is one of good riddance to the rapacious son of a bitch who has held me and my loved ones hostage for lo, these twenty-something years. The recent ruling of the U. S. Supreme Court notwithstanding, the corporation that holds debts and treats them like assets has no method for, nor desire of, obtaining human connection, and therefore is owed NOTHING but the contractual obligation -- no guilt, no respect, NOTHING.

If the debt is to a member of one's own family or a beloved friend, whatever love might have existed before the debt was incurred is quickly extinguished simply by the fact of that same debt. The holder of the emotionally charged IOU no doubt feels that he's being taken advantage of by the relative or friend -- that his material success is seen by those closest to him as an opportunity for their own enrichment. The debtor,on the other hand, probably feels that this loan is the very least that could be done for him by a rich, fat relative, and besides, he never liked that smug attitude that guy exhibited once he got lucky with cards (or the stock market or a hedge fund or a surprising hit TV show, and the debtor is sure that hard work had nothing to do with it); in fact, he OWES it to his less LUCKY relatives and friends to support them as long as the money holds out. Neither of these positions is conducive to a loving relationship. Rather, the relationship, built either on blood (soon to be bad blood), or upon what each had thought was close friendship, is irrevocably contaminated, doomed in fact, by the obligation.

The only way to conserve, maintain, even hope for, a loving, loyal, trusting connection is to have all interpersonal transactions be gifts of the heart, no more, no less. All gifts are to be given with no expectation of repayment of any kind at any time; they must be forgotten and forgiven at the exact moment of giving. Likewise, all such gifts freely given must be accepted at once, gratitude expressed, and then similarly forgotten and forgiven. In every sense a gift freely given cannot be repaid, and to try to do so is to reduce the gift to mere indulgence or one with the quid pro quo firmly in mind. That cannot be allowed to occur, to either party.

Capitalism has ruined us for such a concept, and we really do have to take back that operation of the heart and spirit, at the very least for transactions with our closest connections.

Favors I consider to be the white lies of obligation -- it's the same thing, comes out to the same result: the sacrifice of connection to the muck and mire of mere money. There's no value in money, and the value of connection cannot be calculated by any earthly measure.

So, when somebody says, "Don't do me any favors," he really means it. It is simply not worth the price.