- Capitalism and Alternatives -

Here's one for the intllek...entllxut...unt...intelekchu...intellectuoll...intellectuals. I knew I could do it...

Posted by: Frenchy on December 01, 1999 at 11:21:17:

This is another installment from Ludwig Von Mises' "The Anti-Capitalistic Mentality", Libertarian Press. Copyright 1972.

5. The Resentment of the Intellectuals

The common man as a rule does not have the opportunity of consorting with people who have succeeded better than he has. He moves in the circle of other common men. He never meets his boss socially. He never learns from personal experience how different an entrepreneur or an executive is with regard to all those abilities and faculties which are required for successfully serving the consumers. His envy and the resentment it engenders are not directed against a living being of flesh and blood, but against pale abstractions like "management," "capital' and "Wall Street." It is impossible to abominate such a faint shadow with the same bitterness of feeling that one may bear against a fellow creature whom one encounters daily.
It is different with people whom special conditions of their occupation or their family affiliation bring into personal contact with the winners of the prizes which-as they believe-by rights should have been given to themselves. With them the feelings of frustrated ambition become especially poignant because they engender hatred of concrete living beings. They loathe Capitalism because it has assigned to this other man the positions they themselves would like to have.
Such is the case with those pwople who are commonly called the intellectuals. Take for instance the physicians. Daily routine and experience make every doctor cognizant of the fact that there exists a hierarchy in which all medical men are graded according to their merits and achievements. Those more eminent than he himself is, those whose methods and innovatios he must learn and practice in order to be up to date were his classmates in the medical school, they served with him as internes, they attend with him the meetings of medical associations. He meets them at the bedside of patients as well as in social gatherings. Some of them are his personal friends or related to him, and they all behave toward him with the utmost civility and address him as their dear colleague. But they tower far above him in the appreciation of the public and often also in height of income.They have outstripped him and now belong to another class of men. When he compares himself with them, he feels humiliated. But he must watch himself carefully lest anybody notice his resentment and envy. Even the slightest indication of such feelings would be looked upon as very bad manners and would depreciate him in the eyes of everbody. He must swallow down his mortification and divert his wrath toward a vicarious target. He indicts society's economic organization, the nefarious system of capitalism. But for this unfair regime his abilities and talents, his zeal and achievements would have brought him the rich reward they deserve.
It is the same with many lawers and teachers, artists and actors, writers and journalists, architects and scientific research workers, engineers and chemists. They, too, feel frustrated because they are vexed by the ascendancy of their more successful colleagues, their former schoolfellows and cronies. Their resentment is deepened by precisely those codes of professional conduct and ethics that throw a veil of comradeship and colleagueship over the reality of competition. To understand the intellectual's abhorrence of capitalism one must realize that in his mind this system is incarnated in a definite number of compeers whose success he resents and whom he makes responsible for the frustration of his own farflung ambitions. His passionate dislike of capitalism is a mere blind for his hatred of some successful "colleagues."

OK peanut gallery, wasn't that informative?
What I get from this is that human nature is the stumbling block. It's normal to feel resentment towards somebody who is successful but who you think is a shmuck. There must be some grevious mistake if that SOB gets a promotion or recognition that everyone knows belongs to you! It's not fair! It's criminal!
The irony is that when enough of these types of second raters get power, their shortcomings become even more apparent, particularly to historians.
Just wondering; can this resentment lead to a conversion to atheism? Thoughts?

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup