I don't think that lefties are all that concerned with inequality as such. What they are concerned with privilege. The purpose of liberal government is to eliminate privilege especially when it is not justified by circumstances. Most people have no problem with higher incomes for more competent people if the higher wages are contingent on and commensurable with difference in competency and the different to contribution that this makes.
What people object to is privilege that is incommensurable, for example, when it is based on the luck of the draw like inherited status and wealth. However, they are more exercised when they perceive privilege to result from cronyism and corruption. I think this is where we are now in the US, the UK, and the EZ.
This was, by the way, a chief contributing factor to the failure of communism. I have heard this from several friends from Eastern Europe that grew up under communism. They reported being taught socialism from grammar school days and were appalled when they grew up and found that the regime was anything but socialist and instead run by a gang of would-be aristocrats. Having come to the US, they are also appalled at what they see as the moral failure of so-called capitalism. They see the same type of cronyism and corruption, and they are greatly saddened that the statue of liberty wears a mask and has feet of clay.
Stumbling and Mumbling
Why Inequality Matters
Chris Dillow | Investors Chronicle
4 comments:
No.
Left takes equality/inequality.
Right takes liberty/let them eat cake.
Right uses Witten philosophy to deconstruct left.
Now this is Tom & Eric's rant.
I have found anecdotally that most people, including pretty far lefties, don't mind inequality if it is justified. Where resistance arises is wrt to unfairness, and they don't buy the rationale that unlimited incentives on the upside and downside are needed to make capitalism work optimally. They see that as self-serving rationalization without substance in reason or fact. In addition, lefties in particular don't like to see people acquiring extraordinary privilege by skirt rules that apply to others like themselves. So its seems much more to me to be a result of sensitivity to fairness and justice, as well as a vision of what is possible through application of intelligence, than class envy based on the existence of inequality alone, as the rich seem to see it.
I think it is a matter of respect. And dignity.
When you hold a new born baby in your arms, there is so much respect for the miracle of life. And yet it is the same being, now 20, 30, 40, 80 years old. What happened to that basic respect for another human being? To the understanding of the preciousness of life? This knowledge is only available to those who know how to love. Those who do not know are unable to respect themselves, thus unable to respect others. Sadly, and unnecessarily, they have lost touch with what it means to be human, to be alive. Everyone is born 'with the heart of a child'. There are no excuses. Inequality is using a ruler to measure another human being, that has no meaning or reality in life. The heart in every human being, longs to awaken again ... that is our existence!
@Tom
I am one of those that have had such experience as described in the post and fully agree with it.
Elites in power describe how they see the system, because that is how it works for them, but regular people as we grow up do not find it that way.
Elites suffer from the same ailments in both socialist and capitalist systems when it doesn't work. When it works, it works because they do eqaully the same things no matter the differences in the systems.
You are quite right, no matter the system, it boils down to sensitivity of fairness and justice of majority. Capitalists knew that long time ago so their emphasis of ideology was in justifying such inequality.
Post a Comment