2 ms·

Totally. The number of people who really felt the implication of the Libor scandal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libor_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li

Totally. The number of people who really felt the implication of the Libor scandal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libor_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libor_scandal) among the general population, for example, is close to 0. Not only this, but term "white collar crime" has been abused to include what is properly termed "implies unwanted externalities", and so it weakens the meaning. Enron executives are not criminals simply because their industry pollutes! Nor are bankers criminals simply because their industry depends entirely on enforcing artificial scarcity and information asymmetry. Crime specifically requires breaking a law! Another related disturbing trend that weakens the concept of "white collar crime" is the "wouldn't you gave done it, too?" argument. That is, to defend cheating or bad faith behavior by arguing that you would have done if you were in the same situation. There is a lot wrong with this kind of argument, and it is similar to "whataboutism" in that it functions as a kind of strawman that tacitly assumes egoism and moral relativism, and moreover projects that lack of principle onto the counter-party. (And if you claim you wouldn't do that, the other person can say you are posturing, etc. A very nasty rhetorical tactic indeed! None of these effects are really new, but I think what is new is that the attention economy has as a side-effect cause an overall drop in the critical thinking skills needed in a large chunk of the population to ensure these cognitive mistakes don't become official policy. There has always been an unofficial bulwark against populism in America, comprised of the "elite" - the well educated, thoughtful, articulate, careful men and women trained in philosophy, morality, and religion, and who are wealthy enough to have time to spend on such matters. Obama was and is such a one. But apocalyptic levels of egoism and intellectual laziness has spread to all corners of our society, even, shockingly, to the elites themselves. (See: Josh Haweley). The net effect is to weaken the notion of "white collar crime" into nothingness, which is great news for those that do it, and terrible news for the rest of us.

guerrilla 6y ago
> Enron executives are not criminals simply because their industry pollutes! Nor are bankers criminals simply because their industry depends entirely on enforcing artificial scarcity and information asymmetry. Not sure about this point. They're only not criminals because their industries can afford lobbyists and few others can.
- javajosh 6y ago
  I'm not speculating about why they aren't criminals, or even whether or not they should be criminals, only that unless they break the law, they aren't criminals, by definition. To put it another way, lobbying is not illegal, therefore the fruit of the lobbying, to make something legal that should not be, is also therefore allowed. But this (roughly speaking, campaign finance reform) is another issue that, like white collar crime, is too abstract to produce outrage, and therefore, too weak to produce enough votes for change (as Bernie discovered).

guerrilla 6y ago

> Enron executives are not criminals simply because their industry pollutes! Nor are bankers criminals simply because their industry depends entirely on enforcing artificial scarcity and information asymmetry. Not sure about this point. They're only not criminals because their industries can afford lobbyists and few others can.

javajosh 6y ago
I'm not speculating about why they aren't criminals, or even whether or not they should be criminals, only that unless they break the law, they aren't criminals, by definition. To put it another way, lobbying is not illegal, therefore the fruit of the lobbying, to make something legal that should not be, is also therefore allowed. But this (roughly speaking, campaign finance reform) is another issue that, like white collar crime, is too abstract to produce outrage, and therefore, too weak to produce enough votes for change (as Bernie discovered).