Consider the following pairs of questions:
Do you support alternative energy? Would you approve of a windmill farm that blocked your home’s view?
Do you believe that people have a right to housing?What if a new housing development might lower your property value?
Do you believe that people deserve second chances? Would you welcome a former convict into your neighborhood?
In each pair, most would philosophically agree with the first question on principle. It’s the second question that gives most pause.
A typical response would be to say “why can’t we put it/build it/let them live…. somewhere else.” This seems a bit of a dodge. Essentially saying that you prioritize your own view/home value/potential safety over those that live where each of these scenarios would play out.
This is a natural and highly understandable reaction. Yet it is also the reason why making real change is hard. We agree in principle to ideas but disagree in practice.
The above examples may seem pretty clean cut. But what happens when it is a question of where refugees fleeing life or death situations can resettle? Or whether children can be bused into a neighborhood for better schools? If a clinic that performs abortions can open up in your town?
The term used for this phenomenon is NIMBY-ism (Not In My Backyard), but in fairness the term is too judgmental to serve a real purpose.
Ideally, we can have conversations that allow us to live up to our principles while mitigating our concerns.
Yes, I love alternative energy. But how can we integrate windmills or solar panels into our natural environment?
We want people to join our neighborhood. But how can we construct the best housing for them that protects everyone’s value.
I want this person to turns his life around here. How can we make him feel welcome while helping us feel safe?
These are really, really hard conversations and I must admit that I have fallen into the NIMBY-ism trap – both doing it myself AND unfairly accusing others of it.
In talking to our children about this recently, our girls giggled at how silly NIMBY-ism sounded as a word. But they too struggled with it as a concept. Asking them if they “liked where they lived just as it was” or “if they would sacrifice a little so others could enjoy the same benefits that they do” was a difficult choice for them. And so it is for all of us.