← Back to context

Comment by nemothekid

3 days ago

Noblesse oblige used to be a virtue among the noble but it seems now people consider it "Absurd and corrosive"

2 comments

nemothekid

Reply
alexjplant  3 days ago

OP said of the author:

> Why in the world does the author have to feel so bad about beibg lucky in some way? How does luck deserve the feeling of guilt?

The author themselves said:

> That I was born in the capital of the world’s richest country is one of the greatest strokes of luck in my life—a pure accident of timing and gametes. There is no way to pay back this good fortune, and wallowing in guilt over it would do nothing, either.

You mentioned "noblesse oblige" which is

> a French expression that means that nobility extends beyond mere entitlement, requiring people who hold such status to fulfill social responsibilities

It seems that everybody is talking past one another in this exchange. The author acknowledges that guilt over this is unproductive and implicitly admonishes readers of means to help those less fortunate in the same paragraph:

> The quiet miracle of charity and global aid is that the uneven distribution of global wealth creates an asymmetry by which relatively trivial amounts of money from the rich can prevent immense suffering and death among the poor.

One can simultaneously shed feelings of guilt over their fortunate socioeconomic position and give to those less fortunate. These two things are not mutually exclusive. To say that somebody should feel bad over something over which they had no control is nothing more than a secular version of original sin. I know I'd prefer to have a privileged class that pays it forward out of an intrinsic motivation to do good instead of a negative one like guilt... seems more stable and less prone to class warfare, but then again I'm no historian or anthropologist.