Paternalism vs. Freedom

The morning sun was shining, the A group awaited (Mr. Li and Toffee among them), and I was feeling less than mellow.

"Let me tell you the new rules," I opened. "There will be no talking ... unless you are answering my question. You cannot talk to each other in Chinese. You cannot talk to each other in English. You cannot tell jokes in Chinese (hard look at a Toffee confederate). You cannot talk at all in Chinese unless I ask you to translate a word for the class or you are answering a question from Mr. Li. If you talk to your friends, I will ask you to leave the room.

"Of course, a teacher should not send students out of the class without a warning. So I am giving you a warning right now. I will send you out of the class if you do not follow these rules.

"That was your final warning.

"If you are feeling sick, or upset in any way, then you can speak to me before class and you do not have to attend the class. If you are in the class, you will have done your homework. Before the class. You will read the assigned reading, and you will look up the words you do not know. I know what is easy and what is hard. If you have not done the homework, I will know it when I ask you questions. If you have not done the homework, I will make a mark next to your name. If it happens two times, you will get a failing grade in this course. I cannot promise you that you will not go to England if that happens. But I can tell you that your grade in this course will be a fail.

"I know a few students here have a very low level of English and can hardly understand anything. If it looks like that is the reason why you can't answer a question, then I am not sure it makes any sense to send you to England, and I will be discussing your case with the ICB administration.

"I may be adding more rules in the future.

"Now, turn to the assigned reading."

We then had, really, quite a pleasant class. The students were quiet; relatively attentive; and I really got some comprehension across to them, more than I remember getting across to this group in quite some time. I was asking questions; students were volunteering answers; we were making intellectual headway. Even Mr. Li, across the linguistic divide, appeared taken by the interesting, relevant subject we were dealing with -- not to mention impressed with the way the rigidly controlled 90-minute session proceeded.

I imagine, fantastically, that some might have "issues" with my approach. But giving 18-year-old children "freedom" to harm their own and their peers' education is so patently foolish it's not even worth arguing. What's worth remarking is the implications for society at large about the benefits of some degree of government paternalism. Of course, our governments today generally are intellectually impoverished. But imagine if we could get more smart and well-intentioned people involved in government. If you think about the free choices that people make in their lives, it is very very very easy to see how many of those choices are not in their own interests.

I know, I know, what I am proposing is unbelievably shocking, fascistic, impossible.

But no. It is merely unfashionable.

Please don't jump to conclusions. I'm not promoting totalitarianism. I am not saying government should control society the way I controlled that classroom. I am making the most modest, self-evident observation in the world: not all legal behavior is equally salubrious. There's nothing wrong in principle with government (I'm thinking a hypothetical government that isn't the product of the kind of moronic election process that exists in the U.S. and Canada) drawing distinctions and encouraging some things, discouraging others. In modern society, incentives/disincentives are easily accomplished via specific taxes (as we already have on tobacco and alcohol) and subsidies. This kind of thing can target not just products but occupations and industries. The levers are simple; they don't shock the conscience, since they don't pose an impossible hurdle for anyone who really wants something (e.g. smokers); and they really do effectively alter aggregate behavior, and can thus improve society.

There are additional effective and reasonable levers besides taxes and subsidies, e.g. a ban on advertising for a whole slew of unwholesome or unproductive products.

America may be the nation that's most extreme in its freedom-trumpeting opposition to such thinking. But the reading we did in class suggests how, in time, America may also be the nation that most conclusively demonstrates to the world how the alternative to paternalism -- the random working of values-free economic forces -- ultimately produces nothing but disorientation, confusion, alienation ... and ultimately chaos and death:

Mr. Noël Mamere, an outspoken though hardly extreme member of the French Parliament, has devoted an entire book to his argument that America is a worrisome society these days. It has a record number of armed citizens. It embraces the death penalty, turns the poor away when they need medical care, and its legislators have failed to approve a nuclear test ban. Yet, argues Mr. Mamere, the United States throws its weight around and would have the entire world follow in its steps.

At this moment, he says in his closing chapter, "it is appropriate to be downright anti-American."

In France, indeed in Europe, Mr. Mamere is by no means alone in his criticism of the United States.

Wander a French bookstore these days and you will find any number of catchy titles ("The World Is Not Merchandise," "Who Is Killing France? The American Strategy," "American Totalitarianism" to name a few) deploring the American way -- from its creation of a society ruled by profit to depictions of the United States as an unchecked force on its way to ruling the world.

The books are only one sign of what experts say is a growing backlash of anti-Americanism. More and more often, Europeans talk about America as a menacing, even dangerous force intent on remaking the world in its image. And, like Mr. Mamere, many members of Europe's political, cultural and intellectual elite are using a kind of moral calculator to deplore the American model as severely wanting.

"With the fall of the Berlin Wall, America was left as the only superpower," said Stephane Rozes, the director general of CSA Opinion, which conducts many surveys for news organizations. "And there is a great deal of fear out there that the strength of America's economy will impose not only economic changes but social changes as well. What they see is an America that has the ability to impose its values and they are not values that the Europeans believe in."

The view of a belligerent United States is growing. Polls conducted by CSA in the last few years suggest that Europeans have some extremely negative views of the United States. In April last year, 68 percent of the French said they were worried about America's status as a superpower. Only 30 percent said there was anything to admire across the Atlantic. Sixty-three percent said they did not feel close to the American people.

Another CSA poll in September 1998, which compared the attitudes of the Germans, Spanish, French, Italian and British toward the United States, found they had deep reservations too. The Italians seemed to appreciate America the most. But they still showed profound concern about the American model. Between 57 and 60 percent said America's democracy and economy were worth admiring. But 56 to 62 percent said Italians should not look to America for inspiration on their way of life or their culture.

On some social issues, the United States and Europe do seem to be going in opposite directions. One that gets a lot of attention is the death penalty, which has either been abolished or suspended by all members of the European Union but is now legal in 38 states. Coming executions are often carefully followed here as examples of barbarism, and American diplomats say they are bombarded with questions about them. The fact that many recent executions have taken place in Texas also colors -- negatively -- European commentators' views of Gov. George W. Bush.

But other aspects of America are deplored too. Essayists have a field day with descriptions of the homeless on the streets, women in jail forced to give birth in handcuffs, drugs, police violence, racism, and what they see as a puritanism that invades people's private lives, the prime example being the Monica Lewinsky affair.

Felix Rohatyn says he has felt the change of attitude take place since 1997, when he arrived in Paris as the American ambassador.

"The anti-Americanism today encompasses not a specific policy like Iranian sanctions but a feeling that globalization has an American face on it and is a danger to the European and French view of society," Mr. Rohatyn said in an interview. "There is the sense that America is such an extraordinary power that it can crush everything in its way.

Novelist Pascal Bruckner, who has also written on anti-Americanism, described how when he was living in San Diego his landlady asked him how was his queen, when France has not had one since the 19th century. Mr. Mamere begins his book with a story about how Steve Forbes, at a recent Davos meeting, invoked the image of a Charlemagne who unified Europe two centuries ago. Charlemagne died more than 1,000 years ago and is usually billed as a conqueror, not a unifier.

"Omnipotence and ignorance," Mr. Mamere concludes about America in his first chapter. "It is a questionable cocktail."

Mr. Mamere's book, written with Olivier Warin, has not been published in America, nor does he expect it to be. "It would be great if they read some of what we write, but they do not," he said. "It would be great if they saw what they looked like from over here. But they are not interested. The Americans are so sure of themselves. They think they are the best in the world, that they are way ahead of everyone and everyone needs to learn from them."

[Excerpted from "More and More, Europeans Find Fault With U.S.," The New York Times, April 9, 2000]

I add: "America is changing Chinese society in exactly the same ways that it's changing European society. Give me some examples."

Someone says China has people working in computer companies now.

But that's not changing society, I say. I tell them in Beihai Park, a nice big park in the middle of Beijing, there's a life-size statue of a man. Not a Chinese scholar or hero. An American in a white suit with a white moustache.

OK. They recognize Col. Sanders. KFC, McDonald's -- obviously eating habits are changing. What about the shape of people? I draw a vertical line to illustrate shapes 20 years ago, and another line with a bulge in the middle to illustrate contemporary shapes.

Then I draw another stick figure to illustrate an American. Big bulge.

"Seems to be an American influence," I remark.

What about thinking and goals? I ask them. What motivated people to go to university years ago? Why do they go today?

What about values and attitudes? I draw a graph with time on the horizontal axis and two straight lines, one going up, one going down.

Say these represent the values of young Chinese students. One shows the changing proportion of young people whose goal in life is to make China a great country; the other the proportion whose goal is to make a lot of money for themselves. Which line is which?

The answer is easy enough even for them. I label the lines. Mr. Li appears riveted by the graph.

Exactly the same kind of shift in attitudes has occurred among American undergraduates over the last several decades, as measured by questionnaires, I tell them.

As for Toffee? Oh sure, there was a brief skirmish about half an hour into the lesson. But I nuked her in a snap. She ended up having to get up and sit away from her friends, beside Mr. Li. She was furious.

A most pleasant morning.

"Strange way of treating a problem," writes my mother of the college administration, responding to my latest missive. "But what will they do with all their free time once you have left???"

I predict catastrophic boredom and a loss of life purpose.

One response came from another teacher who'd been in China:

This is very interesting, and it parallels what happened at my school. That's why I left. I'm in the States now. The admins just want everyone to look good -- a white face who speaks English. Nothing else is important to them. I couldn't stand that any longer and so I left -- without permission.