It was the best of ideas,
it was the worst of ideas,
it was from an age of reason,
it was from an age of greed,
it was from an epoch of belief,
it was from an epoch of incredulity,
it was from a season of light,
it was from a season of Darkness,
it was the spring of hope,
it was the winter of despair,
it was an age of Enlightened Self-Interest,
it was a time for Rational Selfishness.
Prior to rise of republican forms of government (note small
r) in Europe, power was in the hands of the aristocracy whether it was by birth
or property. This aristocracy could be either
monarchial and oligarchical. Most people
belonged to the working class who had no power to influence their lives. Within these systems developed the concept of
“noblesse oblige” where it was the responsibility of the privileged to act with
generosity and nobility toward the less privileged.
Noblesse oblige was a mixture of altruism and
self-interest. There was a certain level
of pity that led the upper crust to sweep a few crumbs off the table for those
beneath them. But mostly, the privileged
recognized that there were more working-class folks than aristocracy. It was in their self-interest to buy the
loyalty of those who waited on them and made their lifestyle possible. Traditions like Boxing Day and charity
hospitals developed out of this self-interested altruism.
However, following the Enlightenment and the formulation of
the “Rights of Man” these old aristocratic monarchies and oligarchies began to
fall. They were replaced by systems that
shifted the power to representatives who were elected by the people. These republican democracies began to emerge
throughout Europe and their colonies throughout the rest of the world. Some maintained their aristocratic roots such
as England. But most began to remove
official recognition of the aristocracy and populism emerged that, in theory,
denied that there was a privileged class.
“All men are created equal, with certain inalienable rights…”
With the loss of any officially recognized aristocracy the
idea of noblesse oblige began to lose favor.
And so, the need arose to provide for those who were “less fortunate”
than others. Note that the language was
about fortune, not choices. It was about
being the victim of ill fortune. The
belief was that everyone was equal, but some folks did not have the good
fortune to be born rich. Others
experienced unforeseen and undeserved circumstances like illness or accidents
or old age. How were these people to be
cared for in a society that was becoming increasingly wealthy with a growing
middle class?
In 1831, Alexis de Tocqueville was sent by the French
Government to come to the United States to examine the prison system. He visited a few prisons but also traveled
throughout the US. In 1835 he published
two volumes of On the Democracy in America. In the second volume he wrote “I do not think
upon the whole that there is more egotism amongst us (France) than in America;
the only difference is, that there it is enlightened—here it is not. Every American will sacrifice a
portion of his private interests to preserve the rest…” Noblesse Oblige had become what later writers
would call Enlightened Self-interest. In
essence it was Noblesse Oblige for the masses.
Enlightened self-interest became part of the social
ethic. It touched on every walk of
life. It grew out of a frontier culture
where everyone had to sacrifice if the community was to flourish. Schools were built. Doctors were brought to town. Clinics and hospitals were built. Businesses recognized that they needed to
provide for the needs of the people if they were going to stay in
business. Churches became centers for
philanthropy as they provided care for the “unfortunate.”
Unfortunately, this enlightened self-interest worked too
well. It raised all the boats in the
harbor. But some boats started to
experience the effect of “super-abundance,” having more than they need and
feeling entitled to it!
When we have more than we need, we would rather invest it
and begin earning unearned income
than give it away. This leads to a sense
of entitlement based on self-assumed merit.
Our blessings that had been shared became earnings that must be
hoarded. The “unfortunate” became the “undeserving”
because they did not have the good sense to save. Whenever we begin to feel we have more than
we need and deserving of what we have, we become less generous and seek ways to
keep more of our “hard-earned” wealth.
The opposite of enlightened self-interest is unenlightened
self-interest, or, more simply, greed. It
says that if everyone looks after their own self-interest then society, as a
whole, will prosper. The
old idea of “the invisible hand” that is attributed to Adam Smith justified
laissez-faire economics of the 19th and early 20th
centuries. Ayn Rand called it “Rational
Selfishness.” Some believe that Rand
elevated “egoism to a moral principle.” In
the latter half of the 20th Century it became known as “Supply Side
Economics.” Others called it “Trickle
Down.”
The gradual drift from Enlightened Self-Interest to Trickle
Down has created a society that is callous to the needs of our neighbors and
has lost sight of our need to share with the unfortunate in our society. Poverty became a choice people made. Misfortune became the consequences of poor
choices. Public morality has become a
quaint idea that belongs to another time.
We have gone from Enlightened Self-Interest to Rational Selfishness and
have become impoverished along the way.
It seems we can’t afford to be concerned about our neighbor any longer.
Bob Dees
