I remember once reading an article in "Cracked" that tried to argue against the idea that demanding the rich pay higher taxes is driven by envy and hostility. It used the analogy of Yoda and Obi-Wan telling Luke Skywalker he needed to defeat the Emperor in "Star Wars." They weren't demanding Luke step up because they hated him, they were demanding it because literally no one else could.
In theory that is a decent argument, but it isn't what politics looks like in practice. When people demand the rich pay higher taxes they usually insinuate that the rich are not paying their fair share, or that they obtained their money through illegitimate means. In "Star Wars," by contrast, no one accuses Luke of stealing his Force powers or not doing his fair share of evil-fighting.
It is pretty telling that no one says "We need money so the government can pay for stuff, we need to tax the rich because they are just so amazingly good at wealth creation that they have a lot of money. We should admire how heroic they are for creating the wealth society needs to function." I have often wondered if the left would be more successful if they embraced rhetoric that sort of rhetoric. Maybe the rich would be more amenable to paying higher taxes if doing so raised their status in society instead of lowering it. The fact that the left never tries it indicates they are too blinded by envy to try something that might actually work.
It sounds like the villages in Mexico are kind of trying to buy higher taxes with higher status, even if it isn't a conscious policy decision. The offices they expect wealthy people to perform do seem to confer some sort higher status on them. Maybe that's why the people in the village tolerate it and don't move asay. On the other hand, the low levels of growth in the area indicate that either the offices don't confer enough high status to make up for the 80% tax rate, or that 80% is too high for any amount of status for most people.
This envy also may also be behind why parts of Africa resist growth. We have an immigrant friend at church who was a successful farmer in central Africa so his neighbors ambushed him and poked his eyes out for no other reason.
I have long appreciated Schoeck's book. I think I learned about it from Tom Szasz. I sure wish it were available as an audiobook so I could revisit when I travel. There are so many excellent books buried in the cellars (so to speak) of academic and think tank publishers, and it's a damned shame that they don't liberate them as audiobooks with AI narration, which is now pretty good. Someone has created what I believe to be an AI-narrated audio version of Szasz's book Insanity, and it is joy to hear even with the odd goof-up in pronunciation. Finally Robert Higg's Leviathan is an audiobook, though with a human narrator.
It's interesting to consider that close-knit, primitively communities actually choked off innovation and development.
They also probably enforced social norms effectively though, and therefore acted as natural checks on gluttony, waste, fraud, and predation. Those checks are dissolving for us ... a bit more every day.
I suspect there’s more fraud than there was 20 years ago… but perhaps not 100 (there are advantages to standardization and bureaucracy and regulation, of course).
But fraud is a matter of concern because it’s socially harmful. It destroys wealth and makes business arrangements riskier. The bigger concern for society is now entrenched systems of rent-seeking: Medicaid, student loans, building restrictions, grants, entitlements. These also destroy wealth. Rather than transferring it to dishonest people, it transfers it to unproductive ones.
Gluttony and waste are private matters if not connected to government. Predation requires definition. I doubt you can prove that there is more fraud now than before, though Facebook and Google are doing their darnedest to spread as much as possible.
But in a society where every failing, mistake, illness, and lack is bureaucratized there ARE no private matters. There are people trying to build a world (and they’re succeeding) where every physical complaint, chronic health issue, disability, and psychological dysregulation automatically becomes a focus for expensive, bureaucratized remedies. In such a world the qualities of resilience, grit, and independence will be actively discouraged.
Something like 3/4 of American adolescents have been DIAGNOSED with an anxiety disorder (to use one example). What does personal weakness look like in such a world, where it’s not encouraged but certainly not shamed, and where every effort is made to ameliorate its negative effects? We’re beginning to find out.
I could not agree more about the threat of medicalization of everyday life. I'm a Szaszian. But you didn't refer to gluttony and waste in that context, you said that the four things you mentioned are held in check by the social norms of primitive communities. In such communities psychiatry would not be the method of social control.
I remember once reading an article in "Cracked" that tried to argue against the idea that demanding the rich pay higher taxes is driven by envy and hostility. It used the analogy of Yoda and Obi-Wan telling Luke Skywalker he needed to defeat the Emperor in "Star Wars." They weren't demanding Luke step up because they hated him, they were demanding it because literally no one else could.
In theory that is a decent argument, but it isn't what politics looks like in practice. When people demand the rich pay higher taxes they usually insinuate that the rich are not paying their fair share, or that they obtained their money through illegitimate means. In "Star Wars," by contrast, no one accuses Luke of stealing his Force powers or not doing his fair share of evil-fighting.
It is pretty telling that no one says "We need money so the government can pay for stuff, we need to tax the rich because they are just so amazingly good at wealth creation that they have a lot of money. We should admire how heroic they are for creating the wealth society needs to function." I have often wondered if the left would be more successful if they embraced rhetoric that sort of rhetoric. Maybe the rich would be more amenable to paying higher taxes if doing so raised their status in society instead of lowering it. The fact that the left never tries it indicates they are too blinded by envy to try something that might actually work.
It sounds like the villages in Mexico are kind of trying to buy higher taxes with higher status, even if it isn't a conscious policy decision. The offices they expect wealthy people to perform do seem to confer some sort higher status on them. Maybe that's why the people in the village tolerate it and don't move asay. On the other hand, the low levels of growth in the area indicate that either the offices don't confer enough high status to make up for the 80% tax rate, or that 80% is too high for any amount of status for most people.
This envy also may also be behind why parts of Africa resist growth. We have an immigrant friend at church who was a successful farmer in central Africa so his neighbors ambushed him and poked his eyes out for no other reason.
I have long appreciated Schoeck's book. I think I learned about it from Tom Szasz. I sure wish it were available as an audiobook so I could revisit when I travel. There are so many excellent books buried in the cellars (so to speak) of academic and think tank publishers, and it's a damned shame that they don't liberate them as audiobooks with AI narration, which is now pretty good. Someone has created what I believe to be an AI-narrated audio version of Szasz's book Insanity, and it is joy to hear even with the odd goof-up in pronunciation. Finally Robert Higg's Leviathan is an audiobook, though with a human narrator.
The U.S. Black community as a similar cargo culture. To escape it, successful Blacks attempt to move into new All White communities
How did all-White communities develop? Not by accident.
"The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America"
https://www.epi.org/publication/the-color-of-law-a-forgotten-history-of-how-our-government-segregated-america/
Whenever the envious see success they call it greed. To fix the problem they vote for Mandami.
You think leftists are more prone to envy than rightists? Prove it.
The world is a big place, and envy thrives, whether governments are Left or Right. Envy is a powerful part of human nature, in all places and times.
The distinctions between left and right are insignificant. What matters is the spectrum from libertarian to authoritarian.
Then why mention Mandami? You could provide countless examples on the authoritarian end.
Because Mandami is an authoritarian and I live in NYC.
Can you name one elected by envious rightists?
Do you think Hitler was "rightist". If so that would be one example.
Twentieth Century Motor Company.
Kind of like relatives and friends who come out of the woodwork when someone wins the lottery.
It's interesting to consider that close-knit, primitively communities actually choked off innovation and development.
They also probably enforced social norms effectively though, and therefore acted as natural checks on gluttony, waste, fraud, and predation. Those checks are dissolving for us ... a bit more every day.
https://jmpolemic.substack.com/p/entitlement-culture
I suspect there’s more fraud than there was 20 years ago… but perhaps not 100 (there are advantages to standardization and bureaucracy and regulation, of course).
But fraud is a matter of concern because it’s socially harmful. It destroys wealth and makes business arrangements riskier. The bigger concern for society is now entrenched systems of rent-seeking: Medicaid, student loans, building restrictions, grants, entitlements. These also destroy wealth. Rather than transferring it to dishonest people, it transfers it to unproductive ones.
Gluttony and waste are private matters if not connected to government. Predation requires definition. I doubt you can prove that there is more fraud now than before, though Facebook and Google are doing their darnedest to spread as much as possible.
But in a society where every failing, mistake, illness, and lack is bureaucratized there ARE no private matters. There are people trying to build a world (and they’re succeeding) where every physical complaint, chronic health issue, disability, and psychological dysregulation automatically becomes a focus for expensive, bureaucratized remedies. In such a world the qualities of resilience, grit, and independence will be actively discouraged.
Something like 3/4 of American adolescents have been DIAGNOSED with an anxiety disorder (to use one example). What does personal weakness look like in such a world, where it’s not encouraged but certainly not shamed, and where every effort is made to ameliorate its negative effects? We’re beginning to find out.
https://jmpolemic.substack.com/p/leviathan
I could not agree more about the threat of medicalization of everyday life. I'm a Szaszian. But you didn't refer to gluttony and waste in that context, you said that the four things you mentioned are held in check by the social norms of primitive communities. In such communities psychiatry would not be the method of social control.