Privilege: The Enemy of Liberty

Harry Pollard

[Reprinted from The Good Society, 2002]

Our danders, not to mention our hackles, are well raised when we speak of corporations, governments, politicians, international organizations, globalization, and George W. Bush.

Perhaps, instead of indiscriminately firing in all directions, we should home in on what is always the basic problem of modern democracies.

The ever-present and growing problem of Privilege.

We use the term Privilege in a specific way.

Negative Law

You'll recall from the last Good Society that during the discussion of 'Liberty and Justice for All' we suggested that Liberty is Freedom under the Law. You are free to do as you wish, so long as it lawful. The spirit of a good legal system is essentially negative - don't steal, don't kill, don't harm others - and suchlike. 

As Leonard Read once said: "Do as you like, but harm no-one." 

We said in the last issue: "the law is something we've put together to protect ourselves. Isn't it?" 

Indicating that we had our doubts.

For a law to be just, the law must treat everyone equally.

Private Law

We use the term "Privilege" to mean Private Law (Privi - Lege) - a law intended to benefit one at the expense of another - or some at the expense of the many.

It creates a society which is by definition unjust. 

Every government in the world is in the business, not of passing laws, but of enacting privileges. And those in government get well paid for selling their peoples down the river. 

At one time, politicians were circumspect as they supported profitable legislation. Now, they hardly seem to care who knows what they are doing. The days of stuffing money into a brown envelope to be slipped under the door are past. 

I think.

An important consequence of this extensive passage of privilege is that electorates, which rarely understand the difference between law and privilege, lose respect for the legislative process. 

They become inclined toward throwing out the baby with the bath water. A George Bernard Shaw character once said: "There's one law for the rich and one for the poor." 

Not quite - there are simply laws and privileges.

Concentration of Privilege

If you earn (say) $20,000 a year, it is likely that you won't find it easy to save much money for discretionary spending. Somehow, people seem to run out of money before they run out of month. 

But let's say you have in addition, a further $20,000 from a privilege. The privilege income doesn't require you to work harder or longer. You need not break into a sweat. You just receive and deposit. 

You can of course have a better standard of living. This is thought to be the end result of privilege.

However, if you have the discipline to forgo the things you simply must have - and instead use the income to buy more privilege, you are on your way to becoming a major player in any democracy in the world. <

We call someone who receives income from a privilege a fat cat - which is what the dictionary calls him (or her). 

This concentration of ownership based on privilege stimulates angry words from the left, even as the right supports it. Yet, the right are surely against government interference - or perhaps it is only some government interference.

Make 'Em Pay

On the left, the procedure has been to confiscate some of this ill-gotten gain by taxation - perhaps the Keynesian way. This is analogous to letting the robber get away with his swag, so long as he gives some of it back. 

The proper way to handle privilege is to end it. Not to adjust it, amend it, or tax it, but to finish it off - once and for all.

Can't be done? Well, lots of things can't be done - until they are.

Countervailing Privilege

This drain of privilege income from the economy is hard on the general populace. So hard that it becomes politically noticeable. 

As it might currently be said, people don't like being screwed. So, to squelch the proles the "Countervailing Privilege" is introduced.

Such things as housing subsidies and food stamps, subsidized rapid transit, are countervailing privileges. Also, for higher incomes, relief from taxes of mortgage interest and property taxes. 

If one wished to remove privileges, he would run into opposition from practically everyone on the country.

It's a great system. 

A poor American family man spends something like half his income on apartment rent, and a third on food. The rest goes in alcohol and high living. Well, perhaps not. Maybe a lottery ticket.

So, he is given a housing subsidy, food stamps, and a line at the county hospital. Also an official designation as a member of the working poor.

Abolish the privilege

Would it not be better to remove the privileges that make him poor and let him pay his own rent or mortgage, buy his own food, subscribe to his own health insurance?

Maybe, we should start with patents, but that will be another discussion - perhaps in the Agoura.

Needless to say, a person who gets a very large income from producing things that people want - without the help of privilege - should keep it all. The Left are probably not too keen on that. But, the Right love it.

The Road to Privilege

The last Good Society pointed out that Liberty is freedom under the law. Also, that when the law applies equally to all, we call it a just system. Thus we showed what we mean by Justice.

So, understanding how we arrive at law - and how we go wrong - is a matter of importance if we want our Good Society to survive - as a Good Society.

Sequence

We start with "Sequence". A sequence describes two events that take place with no connection to each other.

Consequence

Next is a "Consequence". A consequence describes two events that take place, one of which is the result of the other. Scientists look for consequences, particularly invariable consequences - that is consequences that always happen.

Sometimes sequences are thought to be consequences. I kick the village witchdoctor and the local volcano blows its top. I take care not to kick the witchdoctor again.

Natural Law

A consequence that always happens we can call a Natural Law. Remember, we could call it Rumpelstiltskin if we wanted. But Natural Law seems to fit. So, a Natural Law is an invariable consequence.

Rules and the Common Law

In community, we make up homely Rules of Behavior. These are obeyed by most because they make sense. It is better if they are based on Natural Laws.

For example, if you are driving fast along a road, you probably obey the Rule: "Slow down before making a left turn." You don't need to know Newton's Laws of Motion to make the Rule, yet you are using them.

It is dangerous to come out of side road into the main road without stopping, so a good Rule might be to stop and look both ways before entering the intersection.

Law

Unfortunately, people have a row with their spouse, or drink a little too much, or are simply careless, so they break the Rule and don't stop - thereby discovering another Natural Law - that two bodies cannot occupy the same place at the same time.

Thus, something new is born - a "Law". The Law says essentially that if you don't obey the Rule - thereby putting other members of the community at risk, you'll be punished.

Good Laws

A good law should be needed, should be sensible, and should apply equally to everyone. As we discussed in the last "Good Society", justice requires that a law should apply equally to everyone.

Laws are a lubricant that helps to reduce the friction of living in society. And they seem to work. When, for example, we are speeding we seem to worry less about our dangerous speed than we do of being caught and punished.

Privilege

There is a special kind of law that does not apply equally to everyone. This law is designed to benefit one at the expense of others. It is a "Private Law" or  "Privilege" (Privi - Lege).  It is obviously the opposite of Justice, which is the description of a law that applies equally to all.  

In modern societies, privileges have become the second currency of politics. When money is given to politicians they are being paid for a Privilege of some kind. Very often the benefit to the person who gets the privilege is vastly greater than the amount needed to purchase it.

It is convenient to call a person who has a Privilege a Fat Cat.

Countervailing Privilege

Final link is the "Countervailing Privilege" (CP).

When the underprivileged become aware of what is being done to them they get angry. The obvious way to handle it is to remove the privilege. However, when the privilege goes, so do the contributions that are the lifeblood of politics.

So, the politician arranges for a CP. This is a modest privilege designed to keep people quiet. So, someone who is kept poor is given food stamps and a little money.

Soon, his anger at being poor is submerged in the need to keep his own small privileges. Middle-class people find difficulty in paying for a house, so they are allowed to make their interest and property tax payments a tax deduction.

Before long, any attempt to get rid of serious privilege is opposed by those with small privileges of their own. That's why the system is so difficult to remove. Everyone wants to keep it - even though they may be victims!