Noblesse oblige is a faulty concept. A perfect example? Baltimore.
The phrase, a French one, simply means that individuals of a higher social rank are duty-bound to help those less fortunate. It sounds great, right?
The problem with this notion, however, is that throughout history it has been routinely employed to validate unjust structures of authority, as those good deeds — real or fiction — are used to justify a privileged caste.
Closer to home, in the antebellum South, noblesse oblige was employed as an antidote against rising abolitionist sentiment during the first half of the 19th century.
“They’re savages,” the slave owner would say of his human chattel. “Without my generous gifts of food, clothing and shelter in return for their labor, they couldn’t survive.” In this light, the master would project an image of a friendly (and necessary) benefactor, thus legitimizing his position — at least to himself.
Nowadays, though this phenomenon did not emerge recently or overnight, the philosophical backbone of America’s liberal elite is a sense of progressive noblesse oblige.
They are a massive political class that owes their very existence to the hulking nature of government at every level, and to justify their ever-growing existence they must argue that without them, their dependents could not function.
Just listen to the left in the fallout of the Freddie Gray fiasco in Baltimore.
The root of the problems leading to the rioting, they say, is a lack of government involvement in the city. The fix, naturally to them, would be an increased government presence.
And here is the thought pattern at work: there is a city burning and we want to douse the flames. However, to extinguish the blaze, government must grow in size to properly manage the firefighting. Dole out more programs and subsidies, and increase our capacity to provide them. The people of Baltimore need our help, and thus we are legitimized as their helpers.
Of course, this path is flawed. How do we know? Because Baltimore has been the recipient of massive progressive “help” for decades. It’s been reported that the city has received more than $1.8 billion in stimulus funding alone, including $467 million earmarked for education and $26 million for crime prevention.
As Rare’s Bonnie Kristian noted recently, Baltimore spends roughly $6,400 more per year, per public school student than the national average — and about $10,000 more than states like Utah.
So it’s plain to see that what ails Baltimore, and cities like it around the country, is not a lack of government. There is plenty of government to go around for the good citizens of Charm City.
No doubt too much.
It’s no coincidence that, like many other large metropolitan centers, Baltimore has been under the political thumb of a single party for decades. Through their Democratic brokers, Baltimore residents have received progressive largesse for years.
Have these gifts resulted in better circumstances for the underprivileged? If so, it’s been hard to see those gains through the smoke and rubble of recent rioting. But this plays right into the hands of liberal elites, for if there are no problems, there is no need for their services and the power structures they’ve created to deliver them.
About the Author
