When “Rights” are Wrong, Part 4

In previous posts we have seen how the “right” to choose asserted by housing advocates leads to the destruction of freedom of choice and how the “right” to stay is an assault on voluntary action. In this post we will examine the third “right” asserted by housing advocates: the right to equal treatment. We will see that, while this might sound like an appeal for justice, it is ultimately a demand for injustice.

According to housing advocates,

The right to equal treatment demands that public services and facilities, along with certain regulated private services like access to credit, are provided equitably in low income neighborhoods of color, at the same levels they are in privileged neighborhoods of whites.

To be fair, a portion of this claim has some legitimacy. So long as government is providing certain services and facilities, they should be provided equitably in all neighborhoods. But equitable does not mean “at the same levels.” Equitable means fair and just.

The property owners in “privileged neighborhoods of whites” pay far more in taxes than property owners in “low income neighborhoods of color.” As a matter of justice, government should spend more in neighborhoods that pay more. But housing advocates regard this as unfair.

According to advocates, low-income neighborhoods should receive the same level of spending as affluent neighborhoods. Wealthy individuals should accept less than they are paying for in order to subsidize low-income individuals. Those in low-income neighborhoods should receive unearned benefits while those in affluent neighborhoods should be given undeserved penalties. Neither is an act of justice.

Equal treatment under the law is a valid demand, but that isn’t what housing advocates seek. They want unequal treatment for low-income people of color They want government to provide “special help to African-American and Hispanic homeowners in distressed neighborhoods.” No concern is expressed for white or Asian homeowners in distressed neighborhoods. Which means, “special help” is to be given solely on the basis of race or ethnicity. Which means, individuals are to be treated unequally by government because of their race. That is not justice.

If housing advocates were interested in justice, then they would speak of individuals and defend the rights of all individuals, black and white, rich and poor. But they are not interested in justice. They want special treatment for some at the expense of others.

Once again, we see that what housing advocates seek is much different than what they claim. They claim to want equal treatment. What they really seek is injustice.