By Kevin D. Williamson
Tuesday, March 16, 2021
A funny thing I’ve noticed about some of my friends: They
are for the most part successful, high-income people with happy families and
rewarding jobs, and they have enjoyed if not all the best that America has to
offer then much of it: good-to-elite educations often paid for by someone else,
social and cultural opportunities, travel, leisure, security. A few of them
already are semi-retired in their late 40s. They are almost without exception
in the top 10 percent when it comes to incomes, and many of them earn at even
more rarefied levels.
But, strangely, many of them feel uniquely put-upon.
They believe their stories to be stories of hardship
overcome. If they were poor families (as I was), then they feel that this
presented them with a practically Dickensian disability; if they were from
well-off families, then it is something else: They belong to a minority group,
or they felt like outsiders for some other reason, felt like they didn’t fit in
in high school, had a bad relationship or marriage early in life, an alcoholic
parent, that sort of thing. A few of my close friends growing up really did
have heavy personal burdens, e.g., having arrived on these shores as a wartime
refugee from Vietnam, speaking not a word of English. But most of us — myself
included — had it pretty easy.
My impression is that what’s at work in those stories is
a kind of moral greed. It isn’t enough that we get to enjoy the best of
(almost) everything that money can buy or that social status can confer — we
also desire the moral pleasure that comes from feeling that we have earned
these things in a special, personal way, that we overcame great barriers to
achieve them. People lost their minds over the racial aspects of The
Bell Curve, but what is really socially disruptive about Charles Murray’s
thesis in that book is that there isn’t really any meritocracy — if the most
important life outcomes are conditioned on an immutable and largely hereditary
gift that cannot be acquired through hard work and dedication, then you have an
intellectual caste system, not a meritocracy. I think that is much more the
case than most of us who have benefited from that arrangement would like to
admit.
I suppose it is natural to believe that you had it
especially hard and that everybody else had an easier time of it than you did.
We experience our own hardships much more intensely than we experience those of
other people, including people we care about. (“Empathy” is a literary device.)
And envy comes to us more easily than does sympathy.
I think there is a national version of that, too. Earlier
today, I was listening to a discussion about China and globalization from the
Chinese perspective. Americans who are dissatisfied with what we call for lack
of a better term “globalization” tend to assume that the Chinese are very
satisfied with it. They aren’t. Americans see certain kinds of work moving to
China (or to other foreign countries) and feel like we are being put upon by
wily competitors “stealing our jobs.” But Beijing’s view of China’s
relationship with Apple, to take one example, is that China imports some wages
but exports most of the profits, and that this is a raw deal. (Beijing’s push
to “localize” multinationals is partly a reaction to this, as well as a
manifestation of the Chinese regime’s desire to put business under more
rigorous political discipline.) They don’t want to be a low-wage country where
people do rote assembly work; they want to be the country that the profit comes
home to. We are the country where the profits accrue, and we feel cheated
because of the loss of relatively low-wage factory jobs.
Like teenagers, rich Western countries behave as though
our problems are the only problems, as though nobody else is going through
anything. The junta in Beijing may very well be the worst government on earth,
but it still behooves us to try to understand its thinking, because that
understanding serves our interests. At least, it serves our interests properly
understood — I am less and less confident that anybody in Washington
can see reality clearly enough to begin to comprehend those interests, much
less to pursue them with enlightenment and intelligence.
No comments:
Post a Comment