A privilege is a benefit not generally available to the public. There are two source of privilege, voluntary positions, and governmental subsidies.
Suppose a person is the chief officer of a company, and the building has a washroom for the staff and one washroom only for the chief. The chief has the privilege of using the special washroom. It is a voluntary privilege, because the benefit is paid from the company’s revenues, obtained in the market from willing buyers, rather than forcing the public to pay for it.
In contrast, if an enterprise obtains a subsidy from government, and the cost is imposed on the taxpayers, it is an unjust privilege.
What kind is “white privilege”? I will examine this in the context of the United States of America.
Consider easy voting, in contrast to difficult voting. Some state governments make voting difficult for some minority groups, such as limiting the ballot boxes, or imposing difficult requirements that are applied more strictly on the minorities. But easy voting is not really a privilege, since voting is a right held by the public. Blocking the voting is a deprivation of the right to vote. Thus voting by white folks is a right, not a privilege. The minorities suffer, not a lack of privilege, but the denial of a legal right.
Now consider the case of members of a minority being mistreated by the abuse of power by the police. If a white person can go about his business with little chance of being shot by the police, where as a harmless black person has a much greater chance of being shot at, this is not a white privilege. This is rights-deprivation, a deprivation of the right to not be assaulted.
All of what is commonly called “white privilege” is not a direct subsidy to being white, thus not a privilege, but the absence of rights-deprivation. When whites have on average ten times the wealth of blacks, this is not a white privilege. This is the result of the deprivation of economic rights suffered by blacks for 400 years. There is no governmental subsidy that whites are obtaining directly from being white. What is going on is rights-deprivation for minorities.
There is, however, an indirect privilege obtained by whites relative to blacks. Land owners obtain an implicit privilege from government in the form of rent. The public goods provided by government, such as streets, security, and education, make locations more attractive and more productive. The goods thus increase the demand to be located there, which generates greater land rent and land value. As land gets inherited, those who obtained this rent privilege in the past then pass it on to future generations.
European-Americans conquered the land from the native Indians, and then the labor value stolen from the slaves generated greater production and thus higher land rent generally. African-Americans shared little in this land value, because substantial amounts of land were stolen from black owners, and discrimination prevented many African Americans from obtaining real estate.
Thus the greatest white privilege is the governmental subsidy that generates land value to whites who inherited wealth or obtained land value to a much greater degree than blacks.
The way to eliminate this white privilege is to share the ground rent equally, with a levy on most of the land value. Of course society should also stop the rights-deprivation that keeps minorities poor and deficient in political power. But equal rights will not stop the greatest privilege, the generation of rent from public goods, and the way to stop that is to shift all taxation to land value.
The greatest rights-deprivation that is taking place today is the taxation of wages, because engaging in labor and enterprise is a right, not a privilege. A tax shift will therefore simultaneously abolish privilege and stop rights-deprivation.
Nightcap
- What do workers want? Robin Hanson, Overcoming Bias
- Bird brains Nick Nielsen, Grand Strategy Annex
- Democracy, deepfakes, and disinformation Adam Garfinkle, Inference
- Who is Sheldon Richman? (comments, too) Roderick Long, Policy of Truth
Nightcap
- The colonial contradictions of Albert Camus Oliver Gloag, Jacobin
- The making of the modern Right (oligarch’s revenge) Manisha Sinha, Nation
- On being eaten Lesley Evans Ogden, Aeon
- Eternal hospital Hao Jingfang, Noema
Nightcap
- The socialist manifesto Robin Hanson, Overcoming Bias
- Why Amy Coney Barrett should step down Laura Field, Open Society
- There is no expressive duty to vote Chris Freiman, 200-Proof Liberals
Nightcap
- Required reading at French military schools Michael Shurkin, War on the Rocks
- Stealing libertarianism Chris Dillow, Stumbling & Mumbling
- Liberty is self-government, not rights alone Richard Reinsch, Modern Age
- How Big Film distorts colonialism’s legacy Lipton Matthews, Mises Wire
Pop Epistemology
I believe in gravity. I don’t believe in the flat earth conspiracy. But I haven’t done the work to verify either. Instead, I trust that some social process of “science” has done a reasonably good job of assembling and verifying the knowledge that keeps my house from collapsing or my car from exploding.
There are some areas where I’m qualified to hold an opinion. But honestly, it’s a pretty small set of things and subject to an infinity of caveats. The things I “know” are really things I believe because they were taught to me by sources I trust. It’s an imperfect system, but it works tolerably well and it frees up my time to do things like working, and having a life. I’m not going to “do my research” because that would mean not doing something with higher marginal benefit.
What Trumpians realize is that sowing distrust in sources of knowledge gives them an advantage in the marketplace of ideas. What’s worse is that they’re not wrong about the fundamental ambiguity of knowledge. I haven’t got enough time, energy, or inclination to verify that the sun will in fact rise again tomorrow. I can’t scientifically test the veracity of claims of what sorts of noodley appendages touch us all.
Do I know that Joe Biden is a better candidate than Trump? If I’m being honest, the answer is no. I’m not terribly comfortable with that, so I might decide against being honest. I know enough to verify that at least one of the candidates is a turd sandwich of a human being.
What I know for sure about this mess is that the problems are complex. Even a well funded team of experts with broad powers would have infinite problems sorting things out. And the sorts of people we try to put in power are less capable than well funded teams of experts with broad powers.
As always, I hope we learn a valuable lesson here. Complex systems are always going to confound our simple human sensibilities. Given the complexity of society, we should avoid aggregating so much power into the hands of politicians–especially when “the other guy” sometimes gets hold of that power.
Nightcap
- The language of taxation Frances Woolley, Worthwhile Canadian Initiative
- On feudal exploitation Chris Dillow, Stumbling & Mumbling
- A failed experiment John Tierney, City Journal
- Edward Van Halen (1955-2020) RIP Irfan Khawaja, Policy of Truth
Nightcap
- Conflicts of interest in economic research Fabo, et. al, NBER
- In the dragon’s shadow Frank Beyer, Asian Review of Books
- 2020 is a black comedy Scott Sumner, The Money Illusion
- The risk of creeping Apartheid? Chris Bertram, Guardian
Nightcap
- The bottom of the Progressive barrel Michael Koplow, Ottomans & Zionists
- Taking liberties with the history of freedom James Hankins, Law & Liberty
- Happiness: a tale of two surveys Nick Nielsen, The View from Oregon
Nightcap
- Why Adam Smith was right Branko Milanovic, globalinequality
- Understanding the war in Kenya and Ethiopia Dalle Abraham, Africa is a Country
- Propaganda and art in Iran today Amir Ahmadi Arian, NYRB
- The crypto state Bruno Maçães, City Journal
Nightcap
- Tell me about your mother Claire Jarvis, Hedgehog Review
- The internet of beefs Venkatesh Rao, Noema
- Bangkok’s bloodless revolt Kapil Komireddi, Critic
- Rethinking world order Rebeccah Heinrichs, Law & Liberty
Nightcap
- Goya Robin Simon, Literary Review
- Muslim guilt Mahvish Ahmad, Disorder of Things
- Postwar prosperity Jonathan Hopkin, Aeon
- Tripling America Kay Hymowitz, City Journal
- The tragedy of Donald Trump Ross Douthat, NY Times
Nightcap
- Can there be a global history of India’s caste system? Shuvatri Dasgupta, JHIBlog
- Caste, Silicon Valley, and anti-Caste NPR (pod…cast)
- How should law schools treat the powerful? Will Baude, Volokh Conspiracy
- The return of postal banking? Larry White, Alt-M
I blame all of you
Here we are, 20 years into the distant future, and the newspaper of record now includes musical opinion pieces. Don’t get me wrong, I love Weird Al, but I’m sure he’d agree that a world where he’s writing songs for the Times is a world that’s broken.
It would be comforting to imagine this is the fault of the Illuminati. But the truth is our society is the collective outcome of all of our actions. There are constraints keeping us away from Utopia (limited time and resources, path dependence, etc.), but within the bounds of those constraints we get the outcome that we want. And apparently the outcome we want (i.e. want enough that we’re willing to work for it) is a dumpster fire.
Get your shit together humanity. It doesn’t have to be this bad. But it’s not going to get better if we keep rage tweeting about how awful it is how the other side keeps rage tweeting.
Nightcap
- Pirates, liberty, and imperialism Regina Much, Commonweal
- Can hierarchies be rescued? Chang Che, Los Angeles Review of Books
- How to restrain judicial review Ryan Doerfler (interview), Vox
- Twilight of the union Colin Kidd, New Statesman