The Privilege of Earning To Give
By Jeff Kaufman 🔸 @ 2015-01-14T01:59 (+94)
It feels to me like I fell into programming, like it just happened that I graduated college with a skill that was highly in demand. But how did I end up here? Because of my race and gender people were more likely to see me as a potential engineer and take my efforts seriously. Because my parents could afford a computer in the 1980s there was one around for me to learn on. Because they could afford good schooling for me there were classes where I could practice this skill and study the theory behind it. It's hard to know the chain of causality that led to me getting into programming, but it's substantially less likely that I'd be here if I'd not had these advantages along the way.
If you think of privilege as something you have that makes you a bad person, if you know the word and know it applies to you but you try to hide and dismiss your privilege, to find axes along which you have less of it, that's only marginally more helpful than if you were to deny your privilege entirely and insist that all your accomplishments in life have been due to your efforts alone. Having privilege puts you in position where you have an outsized ability to effect change. The best response to privilege is to turn it to fixing the situation that led you to having these major advantages over others.
If I look at my situation, my race, class, and gender privilege have been helpful, but my nationality privilege is by far my biggest unearned advantage. Someone at the poverty line in the US earns more than 90% of people in the world, even after adjusting for money going farther in poorer countries. This is not to minimize the suffering of people in the US, along any dimension, but to illustrate the extent of the problem and the work required. With so much need, how could I possibly justify keeping my luck to myself?
So I earn to give. I can't reject my privilege, I can't give it back, the best I can do is use it to give back.
I also posted this on my blog.
undefined @ 2015-01-14T22:25 (+27)
One thing I note when thinking along these lines is that one of my biggest lucky breaks was my innate mathematical talent. We tend not to characterise innate abilities as 'privilege', for reasons I've never fully understood, but if you understand privilege as 'unearned advantage' as I do then it absolutely deserves a spot on many people's lists.
Edit: On that note, I strongly identify with a quote from Warren Buffet:
"I happen to have a talent for allocating capital. But my ability to use that talent is completely dependent on the society I was born into. If I’d been born into a tribe of hunters, this talent of mine would be pretty worthless. I can’t run very fast. I’m not particularly strong. I’d probably end up as some wild animal’s dinner.
But I was lucky enough to be born in a time and place where society values my talent, and gave me a good education to develop that talent, and set up the laws and the financial system to let me do what I love doing — and make a lot of money doing it. The least I can do is help pay for all that. "
undefined @ 2015-01-14T22:32 (+11)
Being born with the capacity to become highly intelligent, conscientious, physically attractive, resilient, and so on, is surely among the greatest privileges.
undefined @ 2015-01-30T09:34 (+2)
Hi AGB.
IMO saying that mathematical talent is an "unearned advantage" is running the risk of making the concept meaningless. What is an "earned advantage"? Each of us is the sum total of our genes and our formative experiences i.e. things that lie beyond our control. So, taking the idea to the extreme, people deserve neither positive nor negative credit for anything.
undefined @ 2015-01-14T22:43 (+2)
I'm not sure if you want to know why psychologically this happens, but as far as i can understand, it's because
- justice is rewarding people for what they do, not what they are, e.g. the equality of opportunity narrative, tit for tat, etc. and since it's harder to pretend your intelligence is uncorrelated to your competence, it's harder to get jealous about.
- the politically incorrect (Hansonian) answer it's harder to plot to bring about redistribution of wealth from the intelligent or mathematically competent compared to highly visible traits like nerdiness, skin color, gender, etc, which makes the latter better fodder for political justice movements.
(It's not my idea - I'm sorry it's politically incorrect but the key is to try to engage it rationally rather than emotionally)
undefined @ 2015-01-15T14:01 (+2)
Certainly it makes pragmatic sense to reward and punish people in cases where it will have an effect on their behaviour (say on how hard they work), rather than for things they can't change at all (who their parents were). Most life outcomes are an unclear mixture of the two, which makes it hard to know what to do.
On this general topic, I agree with the argument for an extra tax on tall people described here, even though I would lose out: http://darp.lse.ac.uk/papersdb/Mankiw-Weinzierl_%28AEJ10%29.pdf.
undefined @ 2015-01-15T04:56 (+2)
I wrote an essay expanding on this idea if anyone is interested.
Mark Twain wrote:
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way.
This is my steelman of the idea of "privilege". If you've never seen the color red before, and I try to describe it to you, no amount of description will teach you as much as seeing a red object would. So I'm fairly persuaded by claims like "You'll never really understand what it's like to be (gay/a woman/black)". In fact, there are lots of human experiences I will never really understand. And like Jeff says, that doesn't make me a bad person.
undefined @ 2015-01-17T20:07 (+1)
It isn't apparent to me that under your definition of privilege, [demographic] privilege is nearly as significant as many other unique experiences. And also, [demographic] privilege is often used as if everyone in the demographic has the same experience as the average. "White privilege" despite being born in a South African neighborhood where whites are ostracized, "Male privilege" despite being in a female-dominated field, "First World Privilege" despite being born into a situation devoid of growth opportunities, etc.
undefined @ 2015-01-14T23:05 (+2)
I understand that far, but then most people would certainly accept that my suffering is morally equivalent to the suffering of someone of 'average' intelligence, and not privilege me in access to universally rationed public goods like, say, medical care. Yet somehow my disproportionate access to non-rationed market-allocated goods like food is ok. That's the contrast I struggle to get my head around.
If we're talking about redistribution, then we get into incentives issues and this all gets complicated fast. But actual policy is somewhat distinct to the conceptual framework I described above (though having that framework will certainly influence your policy prescription).
undefined @ 2015-01-14T12:03 (+16)
Great point Jeff! Most of us here are very lucky people - to be born humans, in rich countries with an upbringing that provides us outstanding opportunities to influence the world. This motivates me all the more to go out and help others who weren't born as fortunate as me.
"Someone at the poverty line in the US has more than 90% of people in the world ... This is not to minimize the suffering of people in the US, along any dimension"
Something to keep in mind here is that wealth can only go so far, so you would expect that a rich country would still have plenty of unhappy people in it for non-material welfare related reasons. The thing is we know more about how to easily fix extreme poverty than we do about how to solve e.g. serious mental health problems or unhappy marriages.
undefined @ 2015-01-16T00:20 (+8)
Surprising fact I recently learned: depressive disorders have the second-highest DALY burden according to the 2010 Global Burden of Disease study.
undefined @ 2015-01-31T18:21 (+1)
Great post Jeff
undefined @ 2015-01-15T17:07 (+9)
Good to hear this sort of discussion in the effective altruism community. One important privilege/unearned advantage that often goes unrecognized is time. We live in a time of where massive suffering from global poverty and factory farming is coupled with also massive stockpiles of resources, which allows us to be particularly helpful by commandeering these resources for ethical purposes through earning to give, accumulating power and influence, or other means. I greatly admire all who recognize this privilege and take it upon themselves to make use of it.
undefined @ 2015-01-16T02:38 (+2)
Additionally, we live in a time when we have particularly great influence over the long-term direction of humanity, which is another aspect of this important privilege.
undefined @ 2015-01-15T16:12 (+6)
This makes me want to distinguish among different kinds of privilege, as in this post:
Dominance is privilege that is harmful to other people and that no one should have; Support is privilege that everyone should have, and is not on its own harmful to anyone else.
For instance: A habit of attempting to dominate conversations is internalized dominance, and actually being allowed to do so is external dominance; speaking up for oneself is a sign of internalized support, while actually being listened to is external support.
I think Jeff is (mostly?) talking about "support", the kind of privilege that everyone should have.
undefined @ 2015-01-14T16:26 (+3)
In other words, having privilege is a privilege :)
I think it's important for those of us who are privileged in one way or another to acknowledge this. It should help disarm some of the controversial aspects of earning to give, which are precisely a matter of it being a strategy of privileged people which takes advantage of a social system which privileges them.
undefined @ 2015-01-30T09:28 (+1)
Hi Jeff.
You say that "the best response to privilege is to turn it to fixing the situation that led you to having these major advantages over others". I'm not entirely comfortable with this wording. For example, one way of "fixing the situation" would be removing your advantages without increasing other people's advantages.
In other words, our goal should be making the world better for everyone, not only and not even primarily making the world equally good for everyone.
undefined @ 2015-01-31T21:19 (+2)
The wording there is also more deontological than I'm happy with, but I do want to try to find phrasing that resonates for more justice-oriented people. Any ideas for better ways of phrasing this?
undefined @ 2015-02-01T19:02 (+2)
Well, the problem with optimizing for a specific target audience is the risk to put off other audiences. I would say something like:
Being born with advantages isn't something to feel guilty about. Being born with advantages is something to be glad about: it gives you that much more power to improve life for everyone.