One of the things law professors repeat, in almost every course, usually several times in various ways, is "It's about the client, not you."
You expect to hear that a lot in legal ethics, and we did. But we also heard it in trial practice, contracts, real property, business law, wills and trusts, even abstract theory classes. It's not surprising, as the root of the word attorney means appointed to represent another's interests. Of course we're not all attorneys here. Most of us are or try to be advocates, but the root for the word advocate means much the same, one called to aid.
But whose interests? To aid whom? Who is your client?
More below the fold....
Who Is Your Client?
This week Morning Feature will discuss progressive advocacy in terms of "what feels good" and "what helps." Sometimes those two are the same, but sometimes they're not. Today we'll consider who our clients are. Clients, plural, because we don't all have the same client, and we need to recognize that fact. Tomorrow we'll explore some common advocacy traps, situations where doing "what feels good" doesn't help our clients, even when your client is yourself. Saturday we'll examine ways to better know and focus on "what helps."
My client is....
In case it hasn't been obvious over the past several weeks, my client is Fred, our archetypal median American. We've discussed Fred mostly in terms of political messaging - how to find him and reach out to him - and that's important. But for me it goes beyond the messaging. I also want policies that help Fred solve problems, or at least don't make his problems worse than they already are. He and the people he cares about slip into and crawl back out of severe hardship, year by year and month by month. He and Mrs. Fred juggle as best they can, caring for the Fredling (their 10-year-old daughter) and trying to help family and friends as well. They don't always keep all the balls in the air, and when one drops ... something doesn't get fixed, or someone doesn't get paid, or someone doesn't go to the doctor or dentist or optometrist ... or misses a meal ... or worse.
But that's me, and Fred isn't the only possible client we progressives might have, or the only client whose interests I see advocated here.
Other clients may be....
President Obama is a common client here. Perhaps you feel he's an important figure at a critical moment in American history and he needs our full support. (I agree, to a point.) Perhaps you admire him for other reasons. (I do as well.) I support the president when I sense he's acting in Fred's best interests - and I think he usually is, or at least tries to - but when he advocates a policy that I don't think helps Fred, I have criticized and will criticize that.
The Democratic Party is also a common client here, and site owner Markos Moulitsas says in the FAQ that advocating for the Democratic Party is the site's central mission. Again I agree, to a point. As between the two viable political parties in our system, I think the Democratic Party is better for Fred. But I want the party to do a better job for Fred, and if the party doesn't help Fred I have criticized and will criticize that.
Theories and theorists are another common client. Some of us are capitalists (yes, there are some), or socialists (yes, we have some), or European-style social democrats (raising my hand). Some of us advocate for or against religion, specifically or in general. Some of us admire particular writers - Howard Dean, Paul Krugman, and George Lakoff are common examples - and advocate for those writers' ideas. Yet again I agree, to a point. Where a theory or theorist has ideas that I think will help Fred, I'll advocate for those ideas too. But for me the ideas have to help Fred, and I won't advocate them for their own sake.
The average Kossack is another common client, not simply in terms of supporting each other (and we often try to, and sometimes do well) but in terms of the policies we advocate. Yet again I agree, to a point. I think as a community we need to support each other in time of need, and help sustain each others' enthusiasm and energy. On the other hand, a 2006 survey showed our median income is about $85,000, and a 2007 self-sampled poll here showed about the same. That puts the average Kossack in the top 20%, so what's good for the average Kossack may not always help Fred, and what Fred needs may not always be good for the average Kossack. When that happens, I'll be with Fred. That isn't entirely altruism.
Each of us is probably the most common client. I say I'll be with Fred where his interests diverge from those of the average Kossack, but my family hovers at or below median income. I'd like to think I'd be with Fred anyway, but yes ... when I advocate for Fred I'm advocating for people like me and those whose lives are even more perilous.
Finally, Against X is a very common client. The X may be one of the above, or someone or something else. White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is a common X to be against, as are (not surprisingly) Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT), Blue Dogs, the GOP, the Tea Party crowd, corporations, conservatives, the mainstream media, and their leaders and/or advocates. Sometimes the advocacy against X is so heated that it's difficult to tell whose interests, if any, the advocate is arguing for. I'm against X where that's necessary to help Fred, but I'm not much for picking fights otherwise. But again, that's me.
How about you?
+++++
Happy Thursday!