Schoeck_2010_EnvyATheoryOfSocialBehaviour.pdf

362 IS OWNERSHIP THEFT?
satisfy me that denotes part of the current which might, perhaps, be
called the spirit of our times. If Sartre refuses the Nobel Prize because,
as he maintains, his contribution to the future socialist society would
otherwise not be plausible, it is plain that the emotions expressed in this
comment would be inadequate for the planning of a social order, even a
'socialist' one. But a politician, impressed perhaps by Sartre, might add
his weight to the passing of an economically irrational law, in the vague
hope that he would thus be taking a step towards the society apparently
preferred by the philosopher to the existing one.
The same thing may happen if a Christian theologian today proclaims
the end of the age of individualism, and the necessity for modern man to
envisage himself increasingly as part of the collective structure. It is easy
to predict that the politician who is influenced by the oratory of the
atheistic existentialist and another who intends to follow the Christian
theologian will in point of fact both tend towards laws and decrees having
a common denominator. This can best be defined as action responsive to
that which it is believed must be assuaged-the envy of the less well
endowed, even though they need not be really necessitous-for whose
benefit social reality (e.g., education) and economic reality (e.g.,
progressive taxation) must be legislatively manipulated. If, however, the
theory of social behaviour put forward in this book is accepted and man's
possibilities and limitations as an envious being are recognized, solutions
of this nature can only arouse considerable mistrust.
At the same time, neither the existentialist nor the theologian, neither
the politician nor the journalist echoing him, need be in any way guilty of
recruiting the envious. While intentional and conscious use may be
made occasionally of those whose envy has been aroused, such tactics
are expendable. There is something else that is much more dangerous:
sensitivity to the envy of others is so deep-rooted in the human psyche
that most people erroneously interpret the sense of redemption and
peace, which they feel when they have made concessions to envy, as
confIrmation, not only of their moral superiority, but also of the expediency
of their action in the reality of the here and now.
There is a simple explanation for the powers of persuasion which
revolutionary messianism of whatever complexion, whether the Marxist
view of society or socialist economic criticism, is able to exert upon
people of strikingly dissimilar backgrounds-upon the wealthy British