Not Entirely Arbitrary
Lifted from the comments, a difference of worldview:
From subsequent rumblings in the linked threads,
Some replies bemoan patriotism and a sense of affinity with one’s country, while others denounce “supremacist systems and the myth of meritocracy.” At which point, readers may object that being born in a relatively congenial part of the world is not a “privilege,” or by implication a basis for guilt, or a Gotcha! to be exploited by others. Any more than being born somewhere less congenial is a sin, a thing for which to atone.
Readers may also note how an alleged randomness, in which differences in outcome can only be explained by pillage and oppression, and in which nothing has ever been earned, can, for some, be ideologically convenient. And a habit of mind.
“I think they know they ‘got lucky’ but don’t really care,” chides one of the subsequent commenters. “Everything is luck and random chance,” insists another. Note the implication that the comfort and agreeableness of a society is merely a matter of chance, of luck. As if the preceding cultivation of values and behaviour played no part whatsoever. As if culture and civilisation didn’t matter.
You can of course say that a newborn played no part in preceding events and cannot take credit for them. But those preceding events were in large part a product of collective effort, of a preference for one kind of society over another, and of people, including one’s ancestors, behaving accordingly. The “relative safety” of the country in which one is born is not some arbitrary, unrelated thing. It doesn’t arise simply by “random chance.” A person doesn’t just happen to be born into a context that their parents also just happened to be born into.
I could not have been born to Mr and Mrs Jeong in South Korea, any more than I could have been born to a Yemeni peasant couple, or a Californian billionaire. Much as I – the person talking to you now – could not have been born in 1652. The newborn me was a result of a particular lineage, of choices made by specific individuals and the genes of those individuals – who can of course say the same thing about themselves. To imply that anyone’s birth is a random thing, as if it could have happened anywhere, at any time, as if the particulars were immaterial, is, it seems to me, a little odd. Indeed, arse-backwards. And I doubt that many parents see the birth of their child as some random occurrence, unmoored from any context or preceding events. I’d imagine it wouldn’t seem random at all.
Or, as Mr Burkett puts in in the thread linked above,
Unless you imagine a queue of souls waiting to spawn in some small but arbitrary body on a continent chosen by the spin of a wheel. Or cosmic bingo balls.
Update, via the comments:
Ian adds,
In one of the threads or sub-threads on X, Geoffrey Miller and others point out that civilisations are built by, among other things, lineage, ancestry, and no small effort over vast stretches of time. Often with a view to posterity and giving one’s offspring a better life. This prompts someone to reply, rather sniffily, “It’s only by chance you were born to said ancestors.”
As if one could have entirely different ancestors who are entirely unconnected to the ancestors one does actually have. As if, while having entirely different ancestors, you could somehow be exactly the same person you are now, and not someone else. A hypothetical being. The assertion – that a specific person being born in a functional society was some random, meaningless occurrence and somehow unfair – is often deployed by people whose goals are rather questionable.
One commenter, a “pansexual she/her,” insists that civilisations are built by “stealing and oppressing other people.” Other, more edifying variables are not deemed interesting. I’m guessing that our “pansexual she/her,” the one who doesn’t think that lineage and genetic continuity play a role of any importance, isn’t herself a parent. And therefore hasn’t had the strange pleasure of seeing her children develop the features and attributes of various relatives. A sister, an uncle, a grandfather.
Regarding which, commenter Uma Thurman’s Feet adds,
Which is sort of why the Rawlsian tosh mouthed above, and mouthed so triumphantly, with such self-satisfaction, is ultimately unconvincing. Not only is it glib and arse-backwards, it also rather jars with the imperatives and experience of parenting.
Consider this an open thread.
I can’t congratulate myself for having been born where I was any more than I can condemn someone else for the circumstances of their birth.
I can’t say that I was born to certain advantages because I deserved them and that fellow over there didn’t.
OTOH, there’s a type of terminal envy associated with covert narcissism where the envier is bitter as hell that someone was born to better circumstances than he, and — this is the important point — he absolutely will not lift a finger to better his own lot.
“Must be nice to have X, Y and Z” he says with venom. And if you respond with “Well, you could enroll in the uni” or “You could train to do something” or otherwise point out obvious ways of improving his situation, he won’t take the advice.
Instead, he stews in his resentment, and if he’s not a complete slug, he’ll gladly join a movement to tear down those he envies. Out of pure spite.
Jordan Peterson identifies resentment as Cain’s motive in killing Abel, and resentment powers most of the destructive movements in human history. Resentment cankers the soul and it pretty much guarantees you’ll never be content in the world.
Band name?
It sounds like nihilism.
Well, it’s worth noting how the invocation of randomness dovetails with the conceit, expressed in one of the threads, that if one society can be deemed more congenial than another, or in some ways objectively better, this can only be due to pillaging and injustice. The alleged randomness, of things being unearned, becomes ideologically convenient.
“Everything is luck and random chance,” as one commenter put it. With an air of satisfaction.
That’s a work of verbal art.
Seriously, Bravo!
I mean that.
Thank you. I’m still not quite sure how to process compliments.
It’s one of my more endearing, indeed fabulous, qualities.
That.
If my “privilege” came about so randomly, why are you demanding reparations from me? Evidently, the proper response to your ancestors’ slavery is well, shit happens, y’know?
It is really a Medieval mindset, “You are a cooper because your father was a cooper as was his father so you never will become the Duke of Earl let alone a shopkeeper, just be glad of your luck your last name isn’t Stallmucker”.
Their warped ideas, of course, then fail to explain how someone like Ben Carson with the bad luck of being born in the projects had the random chance of becoming a world renowned neurosurgeon.
The ideology of envy and sloth.
Indeed. It’s all “inshallah”, right?
These two apparently disparate groups have far more in common than you’d think.
Yes, it’s a very common progressive assumption. And it’s astounding, how it blithely dismisses the willed choices of entire cultures – as if none of these things actually matter. It’s exactly the opposite of the ’empowerment’ they think they want for non-western cultures.
How the hell do they think civilizations come about?
Agree, but there is a flip side to this. The envy itself is flat out wrong of course but even many elites think this way about themselves because many of them didn’t earn what they have. They didn’t advance from where they started, politics possibly excepted. And because they don’t understand where anything comes from, the cargo-cult thing, they project their inadequacies onto others in their economic class who actually did earn it. They avoid recognizing the Ben Carsons because such people further their own feelings of inadequacy. They effectively don’t exist. If everyone is just a function of pure luck then it’s ok to enjoy the BMW that Daddy bought them. If that last sentence doesn’t seem to make sense to those here reading this, it’s because you do not understand the static-state mindset of such spoiled people.
This is why I strongly believe, like Andrew Carnegie, that wealthy people should not leave large sums of money to their children. Provide them with a good education. Maybe…maybe low interest loans starting out in their own business. Do not rob them of the self worth that you developed by earning it for yourself.
Oh, and
Racehorse name
In one of the threads or sub-threads, Geoffrey Miller points out that civilisations are built via, among other things, lineage, ancestry, and no small effort over vast stretches of time. This prompts someone to reply, rather sniffily,
As if one could have entirely different ancestors who are entirely unconnected to the ancestors one actually does have. As if, while having entirely different ancestors, you could somehow be exactly the same person you are now, and not someone else.
This!
Indeed. I suspect we have all encountered resentful losers of this sort.
On the other hand, I have known resentful “progressives” who did make some effort to better themselves–they went to work every day, etc. But that did not make them any less resentful of those who were born in better circumstances or who were more successful through their own talents.
And I have known many malevolent progressives who managed to conceal their envy and resentment–at least from those of us who knew them only casually. These were, presumably, the more clever ones. Narcissistic and Machiavellian.
I find it a very religious mindset actually. Gnostic perhaps (as if people’s souls are floating around, and ‘blind chance’ assigns them to one body or another, and upbringing, parents, culture, have nothing to do with their personality). Or Hindu/Buddhist (being almost a kind of reincarnation). Even a kind of theism (depending on how you interpret ‘random chance’).
Calvinist even.
One commenter, a “pansexual she/her,” insists that civilisations are built by “stealing and oppressing other people.” Other variables are not deemed interesting.
Another, rather petulant chap snaps, “I’m glad you’re proud you’re [sic] ancestors were out here enslaving and raping people. says a lot.”
It gets a bit random.
It occurs to me this could quickly get out of hand.
It’s that static-state mindset. Most people, even a few “conservative” people whom I have known, see the world this way and it drives a lot of the resentment. I even had teachers, one AP history teacher, who seemed to believe this. For the life of me, I do not understand why political and society-minded conservatives do not put their efforts into publicizing/educating the public on this fact.
I usually get over it after the Belmont Stakes.
“Thank you. I’m still not quite sure how to process compliments.” Hardly surprising!
I put it down to my natural modesty.
If one society is preferable to another, or if one individual does better in life than another, and if it’s all just “luck and random chance,” then presumably there are no lessons to be learned. Nothing to emulate or to try, nothing to avoid. No experience to pass on, or wisdom, possibly wisdom earned at some cost.
By the way, I’m guessing that our “pansexual she/her,” mentioned upthread, the one who doesn’t think that lineage and genetic continuity play a role of any importance, isn’t herself a parent. And therefore hasn’t had the strange pleasure of seeing her child develop the features and attributes of various relatives. A sister, an uncle, a grandfather.
There’s another area where the mindset comes in. Why, it’s just ‘random chance’ that you are born with the genitals and chromosomes of a male or a female. Completely blind luck. Biology has nothing to do with it.
Attributing everything to ‘random chance’ is another Get Out of Jail Free card for today’s sociopaths.
Third album name.
Immigrants seem to believe that it is the place that makes white countries so pleasant and rich. It is not, it is the people. There is nothing inherent about Norway that should make the people there well-off and civilized. England is not that rich in resources.
We all are born into circumstances. What you do with that is what makes you a great person or a nuisance. My black neighbor was born on the South Side of Chicago, worked his way through college, became a pharma rep, worked hard, and retired at 57. He did have the advantages of being tall and handsome. He did not resent life or white people. I have mentioned before that Amy Wax was right–just staying out of jail and finishing high school would about double the average income of young black men.
Could?
I want to know more about these cosmic bingo balls.
I like to imagine that they are orange and leave a semi-sticky dust on your fingers. Please don’t go poking around for more information that might cause me any cognitive dissonance.
Heh. Yes, that would seem to be part of the general attitude.
That.
Yes, that would seem to be part of the general attitude.
Speaking of general attitudes…
Meanwhile on another campus they are whitewashing the demonstrators.
Interesting comments …. Twas fun to read. My own experience was born poor in a place of little opportunity. As I got older I developed conservative values and accepted that I would need to be resourceful and leave. Leave, I did.
I never resented anyone who had better ‘luck’ than me. I simply continued to learn, grow up and embrace reality. I had so many good things in my life … friends, music, curiosity, ambition, freedom.
If you do not embrace reality you will waste you time in a fantasy world which will generate envy and resentment. That will also prevent becoming a grown up adult person with good values and a balanced life.
Things that are not real will eventually piss you off and make you bitter … like so many of life’s failures on college campuses this very day who are protesting the Israel/Gaza conflict on the side of the Hamas Orcs
Those people think food comes from a grocery store. Cargo Cultish?
It is simply not possible to build and maintain a civilisation with material such as this.
Some people haven’t been slapped anywhere near enough.
I like that quote, but believe it is too Ayn Randian in its focus on the exceptional minority: In reality, much of progress is due to the numerous more ordinary people who make small innovations to technology and systems–and, most crucially, contribute to the building and maintaining of the culture which is the basis of all success.
Just being trustworthy, conscientious, and perhaps a bit bourgeois is big help.
However, alternative worldviews are available.
RAH, “Friday”
I probably could have succeeded in medical school…but I had other interests that led to a satisfying career. I’ve never been envious of doctors. Good for them. I have had several doctors tell me they wished they had my job. Such is envy.
I like to remind people that Danny DeVito is very short, bald, has an annoying voice but is rich and famous and has been married to the same nice lady for decades (IIRC). You are what you make of yourself.
My friend from Iran spent two years struggling to get out of Iran (in Kuwait etc), got a good engineering job here and when it was clear they would not pay him what he was worth he went out and started his own small company–with much hardship–but is now very successful. Did he have privilege? Hardly. He even still has a strong accent. But he worked himself into a position that no one else can do some of the things he does.
I find it a very religious mindset actually.
My thoughts exactly. Most of these types just aren’t smart enough to see the irony. They’re also the ones who begin every sentence with “I believe…”
This was interesting…
Do Our Rulers Really Believe What They Say They Believe & What To Do About It
This bears repeating. Frequently.
“If there was anything that depressed him more than his own cynicism, it was that quite often it still wasn’t as cynical as real life.” ― Terry Pratchett, Guards! Guards!
As a teen, I was complaining to a friend about something, and he replied, “Feet, you’d be jealous of someone with fifty dollars in their savings account.”
I rather took that to heart as a reminder that the envy strain is strong in me.
Yes, some people are born into wealth, and some place themselves into a middleman position that reaps millions and billions (Gates, Musk, and that lizard asshole to name three).
Over my life, through working jobs I hated, saving money, staying married, and paying the house and car off, I am not wealthy, but I have enough to do what I want to do. I could have done more, but I did what I could given the somewhat dented and bent tools I was given.
“And therefore hasn’t had the strange pleasure of seeing her child develop the features and attributes of various relatives. A sister, an uncle, a grandfather.”
I grew up the youngest of four, so I didn’t see an infant until I was married. The biggest change in my life was when I realized I love my kids and I wish we had had more. Seeing them grow up gave me a better understanding between what genetics hands you, and what you make of them. Also, how incredibly fragile and mallible their minds are. Didn’t someone say, “Give them to me young and I will mold them to believe?”
Vladimir Lenin if memory serves.
That’s sort of why the Rawlsian tosh mouthed above is unconvincing. Not only is it glib and arse-backwards, it also jars with the imperatives and experience of parenting.