Skip to main content

‘Tis the Season for Humility


When pride comes, then comes disgrace, but with humility comes wisdom. Proverbs 11:2

Christmas is almost here and, being a Christian, this time of year always gets me thinking about the religious aspects of the holiday. The 1889 Institute does not have a religious mission, and so it’s certainly not my purpose here to proselytize. There is an aspect of the larger story of Christmas, however, that all men of all creeds do well to remember and take heed. This is the concept of humility and what it really means.

Whether one considers it myth or historical truth, the Bible teaches that God humbled Himself and came to earth as a man, deigning to be born in a barn to a carpenter’s household and grow up to wear, not a crown of gold and jewels, but one of thorns for the occasion of a tortured, earthly, sacrificial death. Without going into the theological aspects of the story, it is plain that it is, if nothing else, a lesson in extreme humility. Humility is a lesson that has been taught from ancient times in a number of traditions, religious and otherwise.

Socrates, who pre-dated Christ, taught that true wisdom starts with knowing how much one does not know. That is, always be humble in what one thinks one knows. 

We live in a prideful time. Pride comes easily in an age when practically every day sees mankind reach a new pinnacle in knowledge and achievement. Nevertheless, policymakers should be cognizant of how much they do not know, how much others do not know, and that much simply cannot be known by a single person, a single committee, or even a single agency, however large it might be. At the same time, it just might be that someone with little or no education knows something profoundly important that most others do not know.

This hubris – thinking we know more than we really do – is a source of error and misery when it occurs in government. When George W. Bush was President, vague notions of Adequate Yearly Progress and what it took to get kids to educational proficiency actually led some states to relax educational standards. The War on Poverty, a result of the notion that we knew solving poverty was merely a mathematical exercise, has been an ongoing spectacular failure. Housing policy has taken so many wrong turns, we’re in a cul-de-sac, ruining lives with gigantic low-income apartment buildings, restrictive zoning codes, and trying to double back with housing subsidies. These policy boomerangs are always a result of hubris, usually on the part of university-trained public policy “experts.”

But failures due to hubris exercised in government are not limited to federal action. In fact, federal action may be less significant in its total impact than the summed results of daily state and local actions throughout the nation. Zoning codes – pretending a small committee is capable of properly determining building locations – are just one of those many errors. Additionally, there are occupational licensing laws, business licensing laws, certificate of need laws, special districts, economic development subsidies and select tax breaks, tax increment finance districts, ear-marked taxes, independently-funded agencies, and so-called deal-closing funds. 

All of these examples, if they are to actually grow the economic pie more than free enterprise, depend on very small groups of people – many of whom have never run businesses themselves – to know more than can be known by those actually participating in the hurly-burly of markets. As economists have long shown, this is a dangerously arrogant self-delusion that easily demonstrates in its logical extreme – socialism – that it is a dismal failure, as shown by decades-long experiments in China, the Soviet Union, and their satellites. The lesson continues in Cuba, Venezuela, and North Korea.

But in our system, pockets of socialism-lite are overwhelmed by the prosperity-producing free enterprise system that still mostly dominates. It turns out that independent human enterprise and the desire to prosper are so strong that if people can enjoy a modicum of decently-defined property rights and keep most of what they earn, market systems are remarkably resilient.

This last fact, however, does not change the reality that some enjoy enhanced prosperity at others’ expense, an expense which outweighs the benefit to the few. Thus, we come back to humility.

Policies that either shrink or prevent the growth of the economic pie, and artificially grant some privilege and prosperity at the expense of others are policies the 1889 Institute is determined to identify and recommend be eliminated. But those artificially privileged by these policies fight their elimination tooth and nail, arrogant in their often self-deluded belief that their position is deserved. The health care industry tells a story of financial hardship – convincing, carefully contrived, and deviously marketed, but ultimately false. The same comes from our various education establishments, and richly-funded independent agencies.

Yet what we really need is humility on the part of our policymakers, who too often think they have been made knowledgeable when they have actually been sold a false bill of goods by those seeking privilege. By recognizing how much they still do not know, policymakers are more likely to ask the critical questions that need to be asked to avoid the error of granting artificial privilege through government. It is not the humble policymaker who thinks there is a government solution to nearly every problem.

Byron Schlomach is Director of the 1889 Institute and can be reached at bschlomach@1889institute.org.


Popular posts from this blog

Licensing Boards Might Violate Federal Law: Regardless, They Are Terrible Policy

Competition is as American as baseball and apple pie. “May the best man win” is a sentiment so old it doesn’t care about your pronouns. The beneficial effects of competition on economic markets are well documented. So why do we let powerful business interests change the rules of the game when they tire of competing in the free market? Most of the time when an occupational license is enacted, it is the members of the regulated industry who push hardest in favor of the license. Honest competition may be fundamentally American, but thwarting that competition through licensing seems to be fundamentally Oklahoman. Oklahoma doesn’t have the most occupational licenses, but when they do license an occupation, the requirements tend to be more onerous than the same license in other states. But what if, instead of merely breaking the rules of fair play to keep out would-be competition, Oklahoma licensing boards are also breaking the law? Normally a concerted effort to lock out competition would v

Undo 802

Why is it that when conservatives suffer a major loss, they give up, accept the new status quo, and fall back to the next retreat position? When progressives suffer a major loss, they regroup and try again. And again. Until they finally wheedle the American public into giving in. I propose a change in strategy. The Oklahoma Legislature should make undoing State Question 802 its top legislative priority for 2021. This will not be an easy task (legislators seem to prefer avoiding difficult tasks) but it is a critical one. The normal legislative process, with all its pitfalls and traps for the unwary, will only bring the topic to another vote of the people. So why spend so much political capital and effort if the same result is possible? Three reasons.   First is the disastrous consequences of the policy. Forget that it enriches already-rich hospital and pharmaceutical executives. Forget that it gives the state incentives to prioritize the nearly-poor covered by expansion over the des

Oklahoma Mayors Acted Unlawfully With COVID-19 Orders

In response to COVID-19, the mayors of Oklahoma’s three largest cities subjected their citizens to draconian shelter in place orders, restricting their freedom, damaging them financially, and undermining their constitutional rights. The mayoral decrees were more restrictive than those of the Governor, and in significant ways contradicted his policy. To this day, city-mandated social distancing rules remain in place in Oklahoma City, Tulsa, and Norman that are not required by the state’s reopening plan. The mayors claim that where their rules are more restrictive than the state’s, the city rules apply. Was any of this unilateral mayoral activity legally valid? For the reasons examined in my paper published today, An Argument Oklahoma’s Mayors Acted Unlawfully During COVID-19 , the short answer is no. (A summary of the paper can be found here .) A close examination of relevant city ordinances and state laws governing the mayors’ COVID-19 decrees forces the conclusion tha

COVID-1984: Have Americans Become Too Complacent in Our Liberties?

Alongside the coronavirus, another pandemic is gripping our country, one that we will feel the consequences of long after we reach herd immunity. I dub this pandemic COVID-1984, and I fear it will rot the roots of the Tree of Liberty. The consequence will be a government emboldened by a passive citizenry. One of the most surprising aspects of our current situation is how willing people have been to report their fellow citizens to authorities for the most minor and meaningless offenses. I used to wonder how people in authoritarian countries like Stalinist Russia and Maoist China went along with those cruel regimes. It turns out a tiny bit of fear is all you need to be a successful dictator. And now it’s all the easier to report your neighbors for reading alone on the beach with tip lines.   Even as governors and judges begin to lift stay at home orders, mayors are extending them. A county judge issued a temporary restraining order against Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker’s stay at