I’ve just gotten done listening to a lecture by Walter Benn Michaels, the author of a book called The Trouble with Diversity. In this lecture, he expounds on his belief that diversity is not so much an issue in America as is equality, more specifically, financial equality. He talks at length about how the wealth gap is growing and nobody seems to care, distracted as they are by issues of race and gender discrimination.
What bothers me about this lecture is that several times he says he believes that rich people ought to make less money, that they ought to be taxed higher (with the money going to “name your cause”), and he mentions wealth redistribution numerous times. What he doesn’t say is how this should happen, nor does he explain how taking money from a rich person makes a poor person’s life any better.
I’m especially struck by a comparison he makes between two sexual discrimination suits, one against Wal-Mart, one against a brokerage firm. His major problem with these suits is that no one is paying attention to the fact that the suit against Wal-Mart is so that the women can make $21,000, while the broker is looking to make $1.4 million a year. He’s appalled by the gap between the two sums. I work for Wal-Mart, though. I simply can’t say that the job I do is equal to the job the broker does, so why should I be paid equally for it?
Additionally, he seems to think it is wrong for a person to make more money who worked hard to get into medical school, got good grades, worked hard at an internship and got a good job as a doctor, then (by extension) someone who didn’t. Apparently, someone who slacks off, flunks out, and flips burgers because of it, deserves to be paid as much as someone who devoted their life to getting ahead simply because it is unequal and unfair.
This logic bothers for another reason, as well. First, I work at Wal-Mart and so does my wife. From conventional logic, you’d think we would be destitute. We’re not that bad off. We own a car, we rent a really nice apartment, we eat well and I have so much technology floating around here it’s almost disgusting. (Okay, it really is kind of disgusting.) However, I would like my life to be better, even still. I’d like a second car for my wife. (Okay, actually a third car, but the Comet needs an overhaul before it’s even capable of running, so it doesn’t count.) I’d like to buy a house. I’d like to feel like I can afford children. To that end, I’d like to become wealthy.
I know this may come as a shock, but I’m motivated to rise above my station in life. Apparently, in Mr. Michaels’ world, I’m not allowed to do that. If his desires for the world were to come true, it wouldn’t matter whether I worked at Wal-Mart or worked hard to make my writing talent become profitable, I’d make the same amount of money, either way. And if I could do even less work for the exact same amount of money, then, let’s face it, I’d rather stay home and play video games. Except, I doubt anyone else would have a desire to create games worth playing, so never mind.
(As an interesting aside, Mr. Michaels mentions in his lecture that he’s had a lot of criticism, very poor reviews and gets a lot of debate about his ideas. The more I think about this, the more I realize what’s going on here. He lectures about this because he actually thinks it’s a good idea, that people will eventually agree with him, if he just keeps explaining it. In reality, it’s nothing more than a return to Communism, and a really terrible idea. I mean, even China has adopted many aspects of capitalism. It would seem to me that there’s clearly a problem with Communism, but it must have escaped Mr. Michaels notice.)
(As another aside, if you really do believe in what Mr. Michaels is saying, and you make more than about $25,000 a year, send me an email. I’ll give you my address and you can send me a check to make our salaries more equal. :-) )
