1
(ForthcominginJuliaCassanitiandUshaMenon,Eds.,UniversalismWithouttheUniformity:
ExplorationsinMindandCulture,UniversityofChicagoPress)
TheRiskyCartographyofDrawingMoralMaps:WithSpecialReferencetoEconomicInequalityandSex
SelectiveAbortion1
RichardA.Shweder(HaroldHigginsSwiftDistinguishedServiceProfessorintheDepartmentof
ComparativeHumanDevelopment,UniversityofChicago)
Duringmuchofthe20thcenturytherankingofcultures,civilizations,andreligionsfrombettertoworse
wasoutoffashioninAmericanculturalanthropology.“Mirror,mirroronthewall,whichisthebestway
oflifeofthemall?”wasaquestionAmericanculturalanthropologistsstoppedasking.Inthefirst
decadesofthatcenturyFranzBoas(thefatheroftheAmericanversionofthediscipline)andhissocalledrelativisticthinkinghaddisplacedtheso-calledculturalevolutionary“whiteman’sburden”
universalcivilizationthinkingofanevenearlierera.BythetimeIenteredgraduateschoolin
anthropologyin1966itwasmoreorlessunacceptablyinvidioustouseexpressionssuchas“primitive”,
“savage”,“barbaric”,“heathen”oreven“underdeveloped”tocharacterizeculturalgroups.Asitturns
outthatdisplacementwasonlytemporary.
Inrecentdecadesglobalmoralmappinghasbecomepopularagain,eveninculturalanthropology.
Moralmappinghasbeenontheascendencyeversincetheriseofglobalfeminismandofvariousother
1
Iamgratefulfortheconfidencereflectedintheselectionofthetitleforthisbookandfortheconvictionofthe
editorsthattherefrain“universalismwithouttheuniformity”actuallygivesexpressiontosomesignificantideas.
Thatmottowasalsousedtonametworoundtablesessionsatthe2014AmericanAnthropologicalAssociation
MeetingsinWashington,D.C.whereJuliaCassanitiandUshaMenonconspiredtogathertogethersomeofmy
dearestacademicfriends,colleaguesandformerstudents-representingseveralgenerationsofalivelyacademic
moietyspecializinginthecomparativestudyofculturalmentalities-andinvitedthemtoreacttoafewofmy
favoritemantras:universalismwithouttheuniformity;onemind,manymentalities;cultureandpsychemakeeach
otherup;seeingisnotbelieving;realitytestingisametaphysicalact;originalmultiplicity(thatlastphrase
expressingtheviewthatatbirthwedonotcomeintotheworldasblankslatesandeachofusisdiverseand
complexfromthestart,bearingtracesofourhistoryandpreparedtoselectivelyrealizeandaddsubstanceto
potentialcapabilitiesdevelopedover“deeptime.”).Iwashonoredandhumbledbythecelebration.Andpleased
aswelltohavehadthatopportunitytoexpoundabitononeofmyfavoritemaximsforresearchersincultural
psychology:namely,thattheknowableworldisincompleteifseenfromanyonepointofview,incoherentifseen
fromallpointsofviewatonce,andemptyifseenfromnowhereinparticular.Giventhatchoicebetween
incompleteness,incoherenceandemptinessthestudyofculturalpsychologymoreorlessrequiresthatyouoptfor
incompletenessandthenstayonthemovebetweenalternativepointsofview,whichisoneofthethingsItryto
dointhisessayontheequality-differenceparadoxandthemorallyprovocativetopicofsexselectiveabortionin
India.Iamalsotouchedbytheaffectionsofmyfriends,colleaguesandformerstudents(includingtheirroastsand
toasts)communicatedinentertainingandseriouswaysduringourgatheringsinthenation’scapitalandfortheir
scholarlycontributionstothecomparativestudyofculturalmentalitiesmademanifestinthevariousessaysinthis
book.IfoneweretodrawatreeofacademicancestryinAmericanculturalanthropologyIbelieveonewould
discoverthatalmostallthecontributorstothisvolume(PaulRozinisafictivekin)wereeitherstudentsofthe
famouspsychologicalanthropologistJohnWhiting(aswasI)orstudentsofstudentsofJohnWhiting.Alreadyout
thereintheprofessionaremanystudentsofstudentsofstudentsofJohnWhiting,many,perhapsmost,ofwhom
areprobablyunawareoftheirdescentlinefromhiseponymousspirit(andbeyondWhitingtohisteachers).My
owncontributiontothisvolumeisanattempteddemonstrationofwhatItaketobesomeoftheimplicationsof
theideaofuniversalismwithouttheuniformityforculturalcritique.
2
universalizinghumanrightsandhumanitarianprojectsinwhichglobalmeansuniversalanduniversal
impliesuniformity.IthasbeenontheriseeversincethefalloftheBerlinWallandtheemergenceofa
“WashingtonConsensus”premisedontheviewthat“theWestisBestandislikelytotakeoverthe
world.”Inlightofthispendulumswinginattitudestowardsthenormativecomparativeanalysisof
culturalgroupsthisessayexploreswaystodosowhileavoidingethnocentrismandtheassociated
hazardsofinvidiousglobalcomparisons.
Twoexamplesofnormativecomparativeanalysiswillbethemainfocioftheessay.Thefirstconcerns
economicinequalityintheUnitedStates.AmongliberalegalitariansintheUnitedStatesthesedays
thereisaprogressive’ssenseofnationalcrisisandaperceptionofdeclineassociatedwiththebelief
thateconomicinequalitieshavebeengrowingforthepastfiftyyearsandaregreatertodaythaninthe
decadespriorto1965.Adystopianpictureofthecountryhasgoneviral,depictingacaste-likesociety
increasinglydividedbetweenthosewhohaveandthosewhohavenot,or,alternatively,betweenthose
whoownthecountryandthosewhodon’t.(SeeforexampleFigure1,takenfromSaezandPiketty2003;
alsoPiketty2014;foracritiqueseeFurchtgott-Roth2014).Thetopichasbeenahotoneforpresidential
candidatesintheUnitedStates.BernieSanderstalksaboutitallthetime.Thesecondexampleconcerns
sexselectiveabortioninIndiaandtheassociatedportraitoftheIndiansub-continentasapatriarchal
societywhereviolenceagainstwomenrunssodeepthateventhewombofIndianmothersisa
dangerousplaceforafemalefetus.Ihopetoillustratethevalueofaculturalpsychologyofmorality
approachtocomparisonbycomplicatingthatpictureofincomeinequalityandbyreframingthatportrait
ofsexdiscrimination.
TheCulturalPsychologyofMorality:AreYouNoworHaveYouEverBeenaRelativist?
ThereisaninvitingaphorismformulatedbytheanthropologistCliffordGeertzwhichstates:Relativism
disablesjudgment;absolutismremovesjudgmentfromhistory.Geertztriedtofindsomekindofmiddle
pathbetweenrelativismandabsolutism.Hebelievedinnormativejudgmentbutonlywhenitdidnot
pretendtobecontext-free.Nevertheless,hisadage,whiletrueandimportant,isincomplete.Itomits
thefactthatevenacontext-richcomparativenormativejudgmentaboutthevalue(orshortcoming)ofa
wayoflifemustbeframedandultimatelyjustifiedbyreferencetomoralabsolutes.
DespiteGeertz’seffortstofindamiddlewayIsuspectitwon’tsurpriseyoutohearthat“Areyounowor
haveyoueverbeenarelativist?”isanaccusationoftendirectedatcontemporarycultural
anthropologistsandthedisciplineissometimesportrayedassoftonsuperstition.Perhapsthelabelwas
reinforcedbythedecisionofthemembersofthe1949ExecutiveBoardoftheAmericanAnthropological
AssociationtodeclinetoendorsetheUnitedNationsDeclarationontheRightsofMan,whichwasa
documentdesignedtohelpsavetheworldbyidentifyinguniversalstandardsformakingnormative
judgmentsaboutothersocieties.2
TheAAAboardmembershadseveralreasonsfortheirskepticism,includingthefollowing:(1)That“the
aimsthatguidethelifeofeverypeopleareself-evidentintheirsignificancetothatpeople”[my
2
ExecutiveBoardoftheAmericanAnthropologicalAssociation.StatementonHumanRights.American
AnthropologistOctober-December,1947,49(4):539-543.
3
emphasis;theirimplicationbeingthattheUNCharterwasaguidewhosestatedaimsforanideallife
waslargelyethnocentricandhadanillusoryairofself-evidencelargelybecauseitsidealswereculturally
familiartoitsauthors];(2)that“respectfordifferencesbetweenculturesisvalidatedbythescientific
factthatnotechniqueofqualitativelyevaluatingcultureshasbeendiscovered”[Iinterpretthisterse
andnotentirelytransparentcommentaboutrespectfordiversitytobeanendorsementoftheemotive
principlethatwhenitcomestomattersoftasteaboutthevaluedendsoflifetheyaresubjectiveand
beyondthescopeoflogicandscienceandhencetherecanbenowaytorationallyargueaboutthem];
and(3)that“therecanbenofulldevelopmentoftheindividualpersonalityaslongastheindividualis
told,bymenwhohavethepowertoenforcetheircommands,thatthewayoflifeofhisgroupisinferior
tothatofthosewhowieldthepower”[theimplicationbeingthatthepresumptivelyabsoluteand
deceptivelyself-evidentrightsexplicatedintheUNDeclarationarereallypartofaglobalprojectof
Westernculturaldomination,andmightactuallybeharmfultoindividualswhoembracealternative
culturaltraditions.[Ofcoursethatinvocationoftheprincipleof“harm”mightsuggesttheexistenceof
atleastonemoralabsolutepositedbytheAAAExecutiveBoardMembers].
Nevertheless,despitetheskepticalviewsofAAAExecutiveBoardMembersin1949,therecanbeno
doubtthatqualitative(andquantitative)evaluativecomparisons(includinginvocationsofuniversal
humanrightsviolations),arequiteprevalenttoday,notonlyinthemediabutalloverthesocialscience
disciplines(includingculturalanthropology).Thisisespeciallysowhenthetopicturnstogender
relations,economicinequality,undemocraticpoliticalstructures,theraising,educatinganddisciplining
ofchildren,andvarioussocalledilliberalculturalcustoms(fromarrangedmarriagestothereshapingof
thegenitalsofbothboysandgirls).
Toavoidmisunderstandingletmeacknowledgethefollowingpointfromtheoutset:Wheneverand
wherevertherereallydoesexistablueprintorobjectivemoralcharterforthedesignofthesinglebest
humansociety(andwecanbereasonablyconfidentweactuallyknowwhatitis)thenarefusaltouseit
asaglobalstandardformorallymappingtheworldandpromotingmoralprogresswouldbeirrational.
Butthatisaverybig“if”,withrespecttowhichdoubtssometimesdolegitimatelyarisesinthemindsof
thoughtfulpeople,suchasthemembersoftheAmericanAnthropologicalExecutiveBoardin1949.
Thosewhohavesuchdoubtsfearthatmoralmapsoncedrawnwillgetusedtojustifyrighteouslymotivatedbutdebatablesavetheworldcrusades.Theyharborsuchanxietiesbecausetheysuspectthat
theenterpriseisoften(notalwaysbutoften)ahigh-mindedformofculturalimperialismbythosewho
arepowerfulorwealthyenoughtomandatethateveryoneshouldseeandvaluetheworldinonlyone
way,namelyaccordingtothedominantgroup’spreferred(andquitepossiblyparochial)setofterms.
Itisonethingtoassertthatthereareuniversalobjectivetruthsaboutthephysicalworld–forexample,
thatforceequalsmasstimesaccelerationeverywhereyougoontheglobe.AndImyselfhaveno
difficultyacceptingthatthereexistsomeabsoluteandgenuinelyself-evidentuniversalorundeniably
validrulesofmoralreasonwhichcommanduncriticalrespectofthesortsome19thcenturyandearly
20thcenturyphilosopherscalledmoral“intuitions.”Forexample,thatoneoughttogiveeveryperson
theirdue,treatlikecasesalikeandimpartiallyapplyrulesofgeneralapplicability(justice);protectthose
whoarevulnerableandinone’scharge(beneficence);andrespondtotheurgentneedsofothersifthe
sacrificeorcosttooneselfisslight.
4
Neverthelessitisquiteanotherthingtoassertthat(regardlessofhistoryandcontext)theexisting
contemporarysocialnormsandmoraljudgmentsofone’sowngroupshouldbeviewedasthebestand
mostaccuraterepresentationsofuniversalmoraltruths.Onehopes(oratleastIhope)thatitstill
remainsabasicmethodologicalprincipleinculturalanthropologytobewarywhenthoseinpossession
ofpowerandwealthassertthatwhatevertheydesireisthekindofthingthatallmorallydecentand
fullyrationalhumanbeingsoughttodesire.Soletmeturntosomecurrentcases,whereyoumayfindit
veryhardtobracketyourowninitialpowerfullyevaluativeculturallyshapedimpulses.Icanonlyhope
youwillbewillingforthemomenttosuspendyourinitialsenseofdisbeliefaboutsomeofthethingsI
amabouttosay.
BriefSummaryoftheTwoExamplesofComparativeNormativeAnalysis
WithregardtothefirstexampleIamgoingtoraisesomedoubtsaboutthewaycomparisonshavebeen
madeintheeconomicinequalitydebates.ThesedoubtsinitiallyaroseinmyownmindwhenIfirst
learnedthat(whenviewedfromthecomparativeperspectiveofhouseholdincomedistributions)the
poorestcommunityintheUnitedStatesisavibrantculturallydistinctiveandexpandingJewishvillagein
UpstateNewYork.ThosedoubtswerereinforcedwhenIbegantoreadtheliteratureoneconomic
inequality.IrealizedthateconomicsisamuchsoftersocialsciencethanIhadsupposed,andthatthe
problemofmethodvarianceinaccountingcategories,measurementproceduresanddesignsfor
comparativeresearchisamajorproblem.Forexample,Idiscoveredthatassessmentsofcurrent
income,assessmentsofcurrentnetworthandassessmentsofcurrentspending/consumptionpatterns
yieldratherdifferentportraitsofthedegreeofeconomicinequalityintheUnitedStates.Tociteone
example,utilizinganintra-generationalcomparativedesignAuerbach,KotlifoffandKoehler(2016)
recentlydiscoveredthat“thetop1percentof40-49yearoldsrankedbyresourcesaccountfor18.9
percentoftotalcohortnetwealthand13.4percentoftotalcohortcurrentincome,butonly9.2percent
oftotalcohortremaininglifetimespending.”3Inotherwordsaprojectedlife-timespendingmeasure
revealedfargreatereconomicequalityintheUSAthancomparisonsbasedonstaticcross-generational
measuresofnetworthorcurrentincome.Hereisonetakehomemessagefromtheirstudy:Any
pictureofeconomicinequalitybasedoneithercontemporaryincomedistributionspriortotaxation(the
decisionwhethertomeasureincomepriortooraftertaxationisitselfapotentialmethodvariousissue)
orbasedoncross-cohortdistributionsofwealthatsinglepointsintimeisprobablygoingtobean
inaccuratedepictionofaperson’sstandardoflivingandisprobablynotagoodpredictorofhisorher
life-courseeconomicstatusaspoor,middleclass,orrich.Thesoftsideofquantitativeeconomic
informationbecomeobviousonceitisrealizedthatthe“harddata”maytellyoumoreabouttheway
realitiesaremeasured(measuringinstrumentsused,comparativedesignproperties,decisionsabout
whattocountandwhatnottocount,etc.)thanabouteconomicrealitiesperse.
Whentryingtopictureeconomicrealitiesevensimpledemographicfactscanbeeye-openingand
complicatethescene:AsubstantialportionofAmericancitizensinthebottom20%oftheannualearned
incomedistributionarecollegestudents(whosefutureeconomicprospectsarefavorable)andretirees
3
Theirestimateofremaininglife-timespending/consumptionincludedestimatesofremaininglife-timebenefits
fromredistributivegovernmenttransfersofwealth(Includingprogressivetaxation).
5
(mostofwhomhavefinancialassetsandaspendingcapacity).Thus,comparisonsofyearlyincome
distributionscomparinggenerationsattwopointsintime,1925v2005forexample,canbevery
misleading,especiallyifthedemographicsofapopulationhaveshifted–forexample,withmoreyoung
peopleincollegenowcomparedtothenorwithmoreunemployedretiredpeoplewithassentsbutno
currentincome(duetoincreasesinlongevity)nowcomparedtothen.
Withregardtothesecondexampleexaminedinthisessay–thepracticeofsexselectiveabortionin
India-IcritiqueatypeofinvidiouscomparisonstunninglyexpressedbyaseniorIndiangovernment
officialwholookedmeintheeyeandsaidtomewhenIwaslastinNewDelhi:“Ifitwerenotforthe
British,Indiawouldstillbealandofbarbarians.”ThisisaviewsharedbymanymembersoftheEnglish
speakingcosmopolitaneliteinIndia.ItisaviewsharedbymanyofmyAmericanfriends.Atissuewill
beadepictionofIndiaasaplacewhereparentsdon’tlikegirlsandwanttogetridofthembymeansof
prenatalgenderdetectiondevicesandsubsequentselectiveabortion.Thepracticeoftengets
interpretedasameasureofthebackwardnessofthatancientcivilizationcomparedtomodernWestern
civilization.Igoingtodeconstructandthenreconstructthatcomparison.MotherIndiaitturnsout
doesabetterjobthanUncleSamatkeepingthewombsafeforgirls;andsexselectiveabortioninIndia
isnotpartofaculturalwaragainstwomen.
Myoverallaimhoweveristohighlightsomeofthechallengesthatarisewhenonetriestomorallymap
differentwaysoflife.Ihopetodothiswithouttotallyrejectingtheaimsandpossibilitiesof
developmentalanalysis.AddressingthatpointtowardstheendoftheessayIwillsuggestthatrobust
culturalpluralismofthetypedefendedbyatleastsomeculturalanthropologists(Iamoneofthem)is
notonlycompatiblewithanormativecomparativeanalysisbutactuallymustbegroundedinsomebase
setofmoralabsoluteswhichmakecomparisonpossible.Butmymainconcernwillbetocautionagainst
invidiouscomparisons,especiallythosethataresoartfullydonetheyseemobviouslytrueandinducein
usaspontaneoussenseofmoralsuperiority.
ThePoorestCommunityintheUnitedStatesIsJewish
JewsareknowntobetherichestethnicgroupinthecountrysowhenIdiscoveredthatthepoorest
communityintheUnitedStatesisJewishthathamletdrewmyattention.Itisacommunitywhere60%
percentoftheresidentsqualifyforfoodstampsandlivebelowthepovertylineasdefinedbytheofficial
standardsusedindebatesaboutincomeinequality.NotsurprisinglythereareTalmudiclessonsbeing
learnedbythedevoutinthatpoorestofallAmericancommunities,wherethemenofthecommunity
spendmuchoftheirtimeinbiblestudy.AfterabriefvisittothecommunityIevenengagedinmyown
Talmudicexercise:spendingdayandnighttryingtoanswersomedoubt-riddentake-homequestions
aboutwhat’srealandwhat’sunrealinourcurrentinequalitydebates.
Questionssuchasthese:IfthepoorestcommunityisJewishcouldtherebesomethingwrongwiththe
waywecurrentlymeasureandportraytherealitiesofincomeinequalityinAmerica?Andbyextension:
WhatisthemostsensiblewaytothinkabouttheshapeofAmerica’sincomedistributionsinacomplex
multiculturalsocietysuchastheUnitedStates,wherepromotingequalityandembracinglife-style
diversitymaynotbeharmoniousgoals;andwheremanyindividualsandgroupsarenotterriblyeagerto
6
turnthemselvesintoupwardlymobilehighpaidmarketableassetsinaglobaleconomyortohavean
equalopportunitytosacrificetheirdistinctivewayoflifeatthealtarofMammon?Coulditbethat
incomeinequalitycomeswiththeterritoryandmightevenbeavitalmeasureofthefreedomofpeoples
inamulticulturalsocietytolivebydifferentlights?Whatifincomeequalitycouldbeachievedby
flatteningoutculturalvariety,bleachingthecountryofitslife-styledifferencesandcleansingitofits
groupdiversity?ThathashappenedhistoricallyinsomecountriesinEuropeatvariouspointsintheir
historyandappearstobeaprocessinfullforcetoday,forexampleinFrancewhereeventhemodest
clothingstylesofMuslimwomenisincreasinglyviewedasathreattonationalsecurityandthesocial
order.Evenduringtherecent2016presidentialelectionseasonintheUnitedStatestherewasa
contentiousdebateovermulticulturalismandimmigration.ItremainstobeseenwhetherEuropean
styleethno-nationalismincreasinglybecomesanAmericanway?Asyoucanseeevenabriefvisittothe
poorestcommunityinthelandcanbeanassumption-questioning(andpotentiallyframeshattering)
experienceforanyonecaughtupintheinequalitydebates.
ConversationsabouteconomicinequalityinAmericadoseemtobealmosteverywherethesedays.
Publicpolicyforumsareablazeinpartisandisputesaboutwhethertoraisetheminimumwageand
culturewarquarrelsaboutwhetheritisshamefultobeinthetop1%orwhetherthereshouldevenbea
top1%.Inacademiccirclesthereismuchdiscussionabouttheobscenelyrichleavingbehindeveryone
elseintheupperhalfoftheyearlyincomedistribution,largelyprovokedbystatisticalanalysesshowing
agradualincreaseinthehigh-endconcentrationofmonetaryearningsbeginninginthe1960sand
acceleratingoverthepasttwenty-fiveyears(BryanandMartinez2008;SaezandPiketty2003;Piketty
2014).
Manyothervoiceshaveenteredtheconversation.Forawhilethewell-knownpublictelevision“News
Hour”programconductedweeklyinterviewswithmembersofCongressabouttheirlegislativeproposals
forclosingthegapbetweentherichandthepoor.InsidetheWashingtonbeltwaythevisionofmiddle
classconsumersdisappearingfrommallsinthelandofthefreeandthehomeofthebravetobe
replacedbyoligarchshavingfunattheexpenseofanimpoverishedunderclasshasgainedpolitical
currency.Severalprominentprivatefoundations–theW.T.GrantFoundation,theRussellSage
Foundation-haveredirectedtheirresearchfundingprioritiessoastobetterunderstandthedistribution
ofeconomicresourcesintheUnitedStatesandtotracetheconsequencesofincomeinequalityforthe
overallwell-beingofAmericanchildren,familiesandcommunities.
Butwhatexactlyisreallyrealandwhatisunreal(orunrealistic)inthisnationalconversation?Acloser
lookatthewayoflifeoftheresidentsofthepoorestcommunityintheUnitedStatesisunexpectedly
eye-opening.WearenottalkingaboutaLakotaSiouxIndianreservationinNorthDakotaorMexicanAmericanbordersettlementsinPresidioCounty,Texas,whicharelocationsverynearthebottomofour
country’smonetaryearningshierarchy.WearetalkingaboutKiryasJoel,anultra-orthodoxYiddish
speakingHasidicvillageof21,357soulswhocarryforwardtheirdistinctiveJewishlifestyleinaone
squaremileincorporatedregionoftheStateofNewYork;whospendmuchoftheirtimestudying
biblicaltexts(ifyouareaman)orraisingafamily(ifyouareawoman);whodon’treallycareiftheir
sexualdivisionoflaborinthefamilydoesnotmaximizehouseholdincome;andwho(whetheryouarea
manorawoman)expendagreatdealofeffortmaintainingaholycommunityandsanctifiedfamilylife
7
accordingtotheirunderstandingsofdivinelaw(includinginstructionsforfoodpreparation,ritualpurity,
modesty,dressandperhapsalmosteverythingelse).
Thatlifestyledoesnotplaceahighvalueongoingtocollegeintheserviceofmainstreamuppermiddle
classconceptionsofcareersuccess.Veryfewoftheadultmembersofthecommunity(almostallof
whomarenativebornAmericans)haveorhaveeverwantedacollegedegree.Itisalsoaveryyouthful
villagewhereover60%oftheresidentsareunder18yearsofage.Thisisunderstandablegiventhe
fertilityrateinthecommunityandtheaveragenumberofpersonslivinginahousehold(5.7),whichare
amongthehighestinthecountry.
ThemedianhouseholdincomeinKiryasJoelisrecordbreakingtoo,onthelowside($23,336basedon
2012censusrecords).Theaveragepercapitamonetaryincomeamountstoonly$6,948peryear.Yet
thepopulationofthevillageisexpanding.HasidicJewskeepmovingintothissuburbanenclave,
admiringitscommunalpurity,andtheaveragevalueofowneroccupiedhousingunitsinthecommunity
($365,600)isabovethemedianfortheStateofNewYork.
In2011theUCLAhistorianofJewishlifeDavidMyersandtheUSClegalscholarNomiStolzenbergwrote
abouttheoriginsofthisresidentialcommunityinthe1970sandthelegalstatusofthenow
incorporatedvillage.KiryasJoel(theVillageofJoel)wasnamedafterRabbiJoelTeitelbaum,aholocaust
survivorandcharismaticanti-Zionistleader4whoaimedtocreateasiteofinsularpurityforSatmar
HasidimoutsideofNewYorkCity.IfyouvisitKiryasJoel,asIdidafewyearsago,youwillencountera
distinctivevillage(althoughonenomoreexotictothesensibilitiesofmostNewYorkersthananAmish
community)wherelanguage,dress,genderrelations,dietaryrestrictions,familylifecustomsand
religiouspracticesarereminiscentofJewishlifeasonemightimagineitina19thcenturyHungarian
shtetl.MyersandStolzenberginviteustorecognizethatthecreationofthisHasidicenclaveis
consistentwith“along-standingAmericantradition–apotentstrainofcommunitarianism-which
permitsdifferenceandsegregation,notleastreligiousdifferenceandsegregation.”(Seeforexample,
Fischer1989)Thereareofcoursemanylong-standingAmericantraditions,includingpotentstrainsof
liberalindividualism,butthatisnotwhatthisparticularcommunityisabout.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-nmyers/kiryas-yoel-theocracy-in-america_b_1124505.html
HowPoorAreThey?
DothedistressinglylowhouseholdandpercapitaincomesoftheresidentsofKiryasJoelactuallyindexa
wayoflifethatispoor,wretched,desperate,ordevoidofself-affirmingpurpose?Clearlynot,andthat
isaproblemforanyonewhothinkstheofficialnumbersthatgetanalyzedanddebatedindiscussionsof
risinginequalityintheUnitedStatesaretruereflectionsoftheactualstandardoflivingofapersonora
people,whetherinSiouxCounty,NorthDakota,PresidioCounty,TexasorOrangeCounty,NewYork.
4
RabbiTeitelbaumandSatmarHasidimmoregenerallyviewtheaspirationsoftheZionistmovementasan
arrogantabrogationofbiblicalprophesiesaboutthetimingofthecreationofaJewishhomelandandStateof
Israel,whichisscriptedbiblicallytooccurafterthereturnoftheMessiah.HenceZionismisjudgedtobea
transgressionagainstdivinewill.
8
Speakingasananthropologistinterestedinthewayoflifeofactualpeoplesandcommunitiesoneis
temptedtosaythatinandofthemselvestheofficialquantifiednumbersonhouseholdincomelack
“ecologicalvalidity.”
AroundthetimeMyersandStolzenbergdescribedthepotentcommunitarianoriginsofthevillage,Sam
Roberts,acorrespondentfortheNewYorkTimes,beganwonderingwhatthepovertynumbersreally
meantinKiryasJoel.Howhardorsoftwerethosenumbers?Didtheyrevealverymuchaboutthe
actualwell-beingofmembersofthecommunity?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/21/nyregion/kiryas-joel-a-village-with-the-numbers-not-the-imageof-the-poorest-place.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
FiguringthatoutandinterpretingthenumbersisaTalmudicexerciseinandofitself.Foritmatterswhat
youcount,andhowyoucountit.Andthecountingprocessislessstraightforwardandmoreinvitingof
interpretationthanyoumightthink.Robertsnoticedseveralfactorscontributingtotheoverallwelfare
ofthisclose-knitJewishvillage,whichextendedfarbeyondtheofficialmeasures.Incomebased
statisticaldistributionsmayseemliteralandup-close-and-personaltomacroeconomistscalculatingand
recalculatingcutoffsforthetop1%andthepovertylineonacomputerscreen.Butthenumbersarenot
reallyrealinandofthemselves.Theyarequitedistancedfromlivedrealities.Theyaresonarrowly
focusedtheyoverlookmanyrelevantfeaturesofthelocalscene.KiryasJoelturnsouttobeanexistence
proofofthehazardsofusingsuchdatatodrawstronginferencesaboutthegeneralwelfareofareal
community.
Therearemanyhazards.Someareassociatedwiththediscretionarynatureofaccountingcategories
andprocedures.Someareassociatedwithdecisionsaboutwhatandhowtocompare.Someare
associatedwithourlimitedcapacitytomeasuretherealitiesof“socialcapital.”Forexample,
unattendedtoandthusunaccountedforinstandardincomebasedpovertynumbersarethemonetary
earningsflowingintotheKiryasJoelcommunallyownednon-profitbutcherythatsellslotsofkosher
chickens.Notcountedistheincomeflowingintoasuccessfulmatzahbakeryownedbyalocal
synagogue.Notcountedarethepublictransfers(forexample,foodstamps,taxcredits)whichare
availabletomanyofresidentsofKiryasJoelpreciselybecause(onthebasisofearnedincomedataprior
totransfers)theyareofficiallyclassifiedaslivingbelowthepovertyline.Notcountedarethewelfare
benefitsthatflowfrompublicallyfinancedinstitutionsinthevillage,suchasamaternalcarefacilityand
asecularpublicschoolfordisabledlocalchildren.Suchfactorsareindicatorsofacommunity’swellbeing(andoftheindividualbenefitsthataccruefromthistypeofcommunitarianliving)buttheyarenot
partofthecalculationofyearlypercapitaorhouseholdincomethatareattheheartofthenational
conversationaboutincreasinginequalitiesinAmerica.
Thereareothertypesofwelfareenhancingbenefitstolifeincommunitarianvillages.Onebeginsto
noticethesebenefitsoncetheunitofassessmentisbroadened,movingfrompersonallyearned
monetaryincometootherlessreadilyquantifiablefactors.TheJewishpeoplewholiveinKiryasJoel
spendmuchoftheirtimeengagedinspirituallymeaningful,value-congruentactivitiesexpressiveof
theirdistinctivelife-style,culturalinheritanceandtheologicalcalling.Someofthoseactivities(the
9
kosherbutchery,forexample)mayproduceeconomicbenefitsforthecommunityasawhole.Butnot
allwelfareinvolvesmaterialresources.Thedevoutinthecommunityhavethebenefitofwhatour
economists(withtheirprimaryfocusonmaterialwealth,economicallyproductiveactivities,monetary
income,andthingsonecanbuy,sellandconsume)mightclassifyasnon-economicwelfareenhancing
“leisuretime,”whichenablesthementospendmuchofthedayintensivelyengagedinthehighly
valuedprojectofTorahstudy,whilemanyofthewomeninthecommunityundertaketheequallyvalued
“leisuretime”projectofraisingJewishfamilies.InKiryasJoelraisingafamilyisnota“secondshift.”It
isnota“firstshift”either;becauseitisexperiencedasameaningfulcallingratherthanawealth
producingjob.
Forthedevoutwhoarepreparedtoembracethisparticularstrainofcommunitarianismanditsworldviewtheremayevenbeawelfareenhancingvalueassignedtounpaidvoluntaryserviceorlowpaid
workatprivatereligiousschools.Andthemostvulnerablemembersofthecommunityseemassuredof
somelocalsafety-netlikeprotections,whetherfromlocalactsofcharity,barteredexchangesor
subsidizedhousing.Inotherwords,theso-calledsocialcapitalofthisHasidicvillagemakesitpossibleto
provisionthebasicneedsofin-groupmembers,whiletheygoabouttheirreligiouslymotivatedbusiness
ofbeingreproductivelysuccessfulinboththebiologicalandculturalsense.Itmaytakeavillagetopull
thisoff;perhapsevenaculturallyhomogenousvillagewheretheresidentsfeelboundtoeachotherby
religion,ethnicityandcommonhistoricalfate,andnotjustbyhappenstanceorconvenience.
Someofyoumaybeinclinedtoharshlyjudgethisentirelife-style.Thatisapredictableresponsegiven
therealityofideologicalfactions,lifestylediversity,andvariationsinmetaphysicalbeliefsandvisceral
attachmentsinamulticulturalsocietysuchastheUnitedStates,butthatisdefinitelynotmyintended
message.Speakingasaculturalanthropologist(andwithduerespectforthoseeconomistswhomight
argueotherwise)lifestylesdifferinpartbecausenoteveryonehasthesamehopesandaspirationsor
conceptionsofthegoodlife.ThelessonsIdrawfromKiryasJoelarenotmoraljudgmentsaboutthe
idealwayoflifeforallofhumanitybutrathersomeassumption-questioningthoughtsandsome
additionalquestionsaboutthecharacterandfutureofAmericannationalvalues,especiallyequalityand
diversity.
DotheNumbersMatchReality?
Thefirstthoughtisthatcurrentincomeinequalitymeasuresarenotamirrorofinequalitiesin
householdstandardoflivingorofgeneralcommunitywelfare.Theydonotserveuswellincurrent
debatesaboutthedistributionofwell-beinginAmerica,orabouthowbesttoidentifyandassistthose
whoneeditandreallydoleaddesperateandimpoverishedlives,oraboutthemosteffectivesocial
policiesforprotectingthevulnerable.Thatthought–thatthenumbersdon’tmatchreality-wasfully
anticipatedbyKennethPrewitt,formerDirectoroftheUnitedStatesCensusBureau,whenhewrote:“It
willtakedecadesofgradualre-engineeringtomatchcensusstatisticstodemographicrealities”.Prewitt
hadinmindproblemswiththewaythegovernmenttriestomapgroupdiversityintheUnitedStates
(counting,classifyingandkeepinggenealogicalrecordsonourcitizensusingoutdated,inadequateor
misleadingethnicandracialclassifications)buthispointholdsforthewaywecount,measureand
portrayeconomicinequalityaswell.HebelievedthatrationalsocialpolicymakingintheUnitedStates
10
dependsontheintelligentuseofquantitativedatayethewasawarethatthecurrentnumbersare
misleading.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/22/opinion/fix-the-census-archaic-racialcategories.html?emc=eta1&_r=0
Numberscanbedeceiving.Everyoneknowsthis.Economistsandsurveyresearchersarewell-awareof
theenormousmethodologicaldifficultiesofaccuratelymeasuring,evaluatingandrepresentingthe
overallpovertyorwelfareofacommunity.Theyhavetomakedecisionsallthetimeaboutwhatto
countandwhatnottocount,eveninsimplyestimatinghouseholdincome.Shouldthevalueofthose
foodstampsbecountedasincome?Howaboutthetaxcreditsorothertransfersofwealthyoureceive?
Arewetalkingaboutpre-taxorpost-taxincome?Shouldthevalueofyourmonetaryearningsbe
adjustedtotakeaccountofregionaldifferencesincostofliving?
Economistsalsoknowthatmeasuresofhouseholdincome,measuresofhouseholdwealth(totalnet
worth),andmeasuresofoverallwelfareofpersonsandpeoplesdonotalwaystellthesamestoryabout
rising(ordeclining)inequalityintheUnitedStates.AsKevinBryanandLeonardoMartinezobservein
theirEconomicQuarterlyessay“OntheEvolutionofIncomeInequalityintheUnitedStates”“the
increaseinincomeinequalityobservedinrecentdecadeshasnotbeenreflectedinanincreaseinwealth
inequality.”Theygoontopointoutthat“…theonlymajorchangeinthewealthdistributioninthe20th
centuryisamassivereductioninthewealthshareofthetopofthedistributionbetween1929and
1945.”Unliketherisinginequalitiesintheincomedistribution,theinequalitiesinthehouseholdwealth
distributiondidnotaccelerateinthe1990sandthenationaldistributionoftotalwealthhasremained
relativelyunchangedfornearlysevendecades.
https://www.richmondfed.org/publications/research/economic_quarterly/2008/spring/bryanmartinez.c
fm
TomakemattersevenmorecomplicatedtheeconomistDianaFurchtgott-Roth(2014)hasshownthatif
onelooksatspending/consumptionpatternsonediscoversthatcurrent“Differencesinper-person
spending,fromthelowestincomefifth[thebottom20%]tothehighest[thetop20%]arenotdifferent
from25yearsago.”Asawayofexplainingtheapparentincreaseinincomeequalityinrecentdecades
shedrawsourattentiontothedemographiccompositionofhouseholdsinthetopandbottom20%of
theincomedistribution.Ineffectshesuggeststhattherepresentationofgrowingincomeinequalitiesas
aneconomicproblemmaybeamiragewhichkeepsusfromnoticingdemographicdifferencesbetween
thoseatthetopoftheincomedistributionandthoseatthebottom.Shewrites:“Thelowest-income
groupcontainsatleastthreesignificantgroupsofindividuals.Somehavelowincomesbecauseoflack
ofemploymentandaresearchingforjobsorbetterpayingjobs.Asecondgroupcompriseselderly
peoplewhomayhavesmallamountsofretirementincome,butsubstantialassetssuchasstocksanda
house.Athirdgroupconsistsofstudentsorrecentgraduateswhoseeducationlevelensuresthatthey
willhaveaprosperousfuture.Clearly,thefirstgroupisasocialprobleminneedofasolution,butnot
theothertwo.”
11
Indeed,wheneconomiststurntheirattentiontoestimatinganindividual’slife-timespendingcapacity,
adjustedfortherealitiesofaprogressivetaxsystemandredistributivewealthtransfersofvariouskinds,
thepictureofeconomicinequalitychangesagain.Auerbach,KotlikoffandKoehler(2016)adoptthis
approach.Theyconceptualizeandestimateeconomicwell-beingintermsofwhathouseholdsarelikely
tospendovertheirremaininglifetime.Astheynote:“Onecanestimateremaininglifetimespending
basedona)estimatedlifetimeresources–thehousehold’scurrentnetwealthanditscurrentand
projectedfuturelaborearnings;b)thetaxesitwillpayandtransferpaymentsitwillreceive,inpresent
expectedvalue;andc)assumedlife-cycleconsumptionsmoothingbehaviorsubjecttoborrowing
constraints.“Theirstrikingfindingisthat“thedistributionofremaininglifetimespending,whilestill
highlyunequal,isconsiderablymoreequalthaneithernetwealthorcurrentincome.”
Neverthelessitistheincomedistributionthathasbeencenter-stageinthenationalconversationabout
inequality.Thegapordispersionintheupperquintilesofthedistributionwithitsrisingconcentrationof
yearlyincomeattheveryhighendofthedistributionhasbecomegristforthefertileimaginationsof
politicians,story-tellersandleftandright-wingcommentatorswhovaluesimplemasternarrativesthat
carryamoraloremotionalpunch.
SomeVarietiesofSpin:TheAppealofaSimpleMasterNarrative
Therearemanyimaginativestoriesonecanspin.Thisisespeciallysobecausetherisingincome
inequalitiespointedtotodayhavebeenpointedtobeforeinAmericanhistory,forexampleinthe
decadesjustpriortoWWI.Analogiesabound.Theperiodfrom1870to1914wasanerawhendiverse
peoplesmigratedtotheUnitedStatesandsomeofourcitizensthoughtofAmericaasa“world
federationofnations.”ButthemeltingpotwasabruptlyturnedoffshortlyaftertheFirstWorldWar.In
1924wesealedourborders.ForthenextseveraldecadestheUnitedStatesbecamemoreculturally
homogeneousandloandbeholdincomesintheUnitedStatesbecamemoreequal.In1965immigration
policywasliberalized.Onceagainwewelcomedthediversepeoplesoftheworldtoourshores.Isit
justacoincidencethatincomeinequalitiesbeganincreasingjustaboutthesametime?Yetthat1870to
1914eraalsoresembledthe1970to2016erainotherways.Ittoowasaperiodofrapidtechnological
andindustrialchange,withallthatimpliesforthosewhoareentrepreneurialandhavethesocialcapital,
theculturalcapitalandthefinancialcapitalplustheindividualtalent,luckanddesiretocashin.So
lookingattheincomenumbersandthehistoryofthosenumberstherearemanytypesofstoriestobe
toldwithdifferenttypesofpoliticalspin.
Inasenseallthecurrentanxiousattentiontoincomeinequalitiesperseisironicbecausetheannual
incomesofthecitizensoftheUnitedStatesarefarmoreequallydistributedthanthedistributionof
theirnetworthorhouseholdwealth(includingallholdingsandassets).Ofcourse,asnoted,all
estimatesofincomeorwealtharetheproductsofmanydebatablecalculationdecisionsandtheyvary
somewhatfromstudytostudy(andauthortoauthor).Perhapsitgoeswithoutsayingthat
dispassionateanalysisisatapremiumthesedaysandhasnotbeenthestrongsuitofpartisan
commentators.Neverthelessreadingtheliteratureitappearsthatoverthepastseveraldecadesthe
shareofannualincometakenhomebythetop1%issomewherebetween10-20%whiletheshareof
America’swealthownedbythetop1%isabouttwicethatamount(Auerbach,KotlikoffandKoehler
12
suggestthatthetop1%own24.1percentofallnetworth,whilethereareotherswhomightsaythat
35%isnotabadguess–thereisfairamountofguessworkinallthesenumbers).
SomyfirstthoughtisthatKiryasJoelisawarningsignthatsomethingiswrongwiththewaywe
measure,compare,portrayanddebatethelivedrealityofeconomicinequalityinAmerica.Income
baseddefinitionsofimpoverishmentclassifythevillageofKiryasJoelasthepoorestinthelandyeta
broaderassessmentapproachleadstoaverydifferentconclusionaboutthestatusoftheirwelfare,
standardofliving,andoverallwell-being.Itisnotasqualidvillage,thebasicneedsofitsresidentsare
takencareof,andtheirwayoflifeisthickwithmeaningandpurpose.Thesoonerwemovetoabroader
assessmentapproachthebetter,whiletakingintoaccountthesocialcapitaladvantagesofapotent
communitarianlife.
TheEquality-DifferenceParadox
MysecondthoughtisthatKiryasJoelisnotanoutlieroraradicallyatypicalcase.Quitethecontraryit
isanidealcaseforunderstandingamoregeneralsocialprocessthatsomesocialscientistsrefertoas
“theequality-differenceparadox.”Theequality-differenceparadoxreferstothetradeoffbetweenthe
amountofeconomicequalityandtheamountofcultural(orlifestyle)diversityachievablewithinany
particularsociety(seeShweder2008).Thebasicideaisthatpromotingeconomicequalityand
expandingthelegalandethicalscopeforculturaldiversity(ofthesortseeninKiryasJoel)arenot
harmoniousgoals.Witnessthefactthatthosecountriesintheworldwiththemostegalitarian
distributionsofincome,suchasCroatia,Slovenia,DenmarkandevenRwanda,arealsoamongthemost
culturallyhomogeneous.Thetradeoffgoesbothways–complex,multiethnic,culturallyheterogeneous
countriessuchastheUnitedStates,Brazil,IndiaorIsrael,tendtoberelativelyunequalinincome
distributions.Perhapsthisisbecauseegalitarianredistributivenormsaremorelikelytogainpopular
supportinculturallyuniformpopulationswherethemembersofthegrouphaveavisceralsenseof
kinship,trustandfellowfeelingforoneanother(seeAlesina,Glaeser,andSacerdote2001;alsoPutnam
2007).
MichaelJindra(2014),theUniversityofNotreDameanthropologist,examinestheparadoxina
groundbreakingessaytitled“TheDilemmaofEqualityandDiversity.”Reviewingtheliteratureon
lifestylediversityinfamilylife,theraisingofchildren,timemanagement,workandconsumptionhe
makesthepointthatformanyindividualsandgroupsinadiversesocietysuchastheUnitedStates
maintainingoneswayoflifeismoreimportantthanthepursuitofeconomicgain.Hewritesthatthe
highachievementpatterncomesatacost“soformanythesacrificesrequiredforupwardmobilityare
simplynotthoughttobeworthit.”OneshouldnotbetoosurprisediftheparentslivinginKiryasJoel
andinotherpotentlycommunitarianminoritycommunitiesaroundthecountrydon’talwaysaimto
liberatetheirchildrenfromfamily,communityandgrouphistoryorinsistthattheirchildrenacquire
thosemarketableskillsorbecomethekindof“capitalisttools”thatwillmakethemupwardlyand
outwardlymobileandcosmopolitaninaglobaleconomy.
SomepictureofAmericaasaliberalpluralisticsocietywhereindividualsandgroupscanbeboth
differentandequalisamoralidealformanyAmericanacademics(seeShweder,MinowandMarkus
13
2002,2002;Shweder2008).Itisthusunderstandablethattheequality-differenceparadoxhaslong
beenatabootopicinthesocialsciences.Bothmulticulturalistsandegalitarianshavepreferredtokeep
itoutofsight.
Multiculturalistsdon’tliketoacknowledgethatincomeequalityismosteasilyachievedinasocietyby
flatteningoutitsculturalvariety(forexample,bygettingridofHasidicenclavesorNativeAmerican
IndianreservationsorMexican-Americanbordersettlements).Theyfearthatifthenewsgetsoutthat
thevalueofdiversityisintensionwiththevalueofeconomicequalitydiversitywillloseoutand
egalitarianvalueswillbeputtonefariouspoliticalusebyAnglo-Americanethno-nationalistsforwhom
“unitedwestand”or“makeAmericagreat”impliesculturaluniformity.Multiculturalistsworrythatthe
goalofachievingeconomicequalitymightthenbeusedtojustifyanaggressivedefenseofthecountry
againstimmigrationandanaggressiveassaultonethnicandreligiousdiversity
Egalitarianstoodon’tliketoacknowledgethatthegreaterthelegalandethicalscopeforlifestyle
diversityinasocietythemorelikelytheresourcesofthatsocietywillbeunequallydistributed.They
findithardtobelieve(andnearlyimpossibletoaccept)thatintheUnitedStatesthereareindividuals
andgroupswhoactuallyrejectEastandLeftcoastuppermiddleclassbourgeoisnotionsofachievement
andsuccess,anddosobychoice,spendingmostoftheirtimedoingsomethingthatisnotwealth
producinglikestudyingtheTorahorhavingbabiesandtakingcareoftheirchildren.
Whileitmaybepainfultoacknowledgecontradictionsinoneswayoflife,thenationalmoral
conversationAmericansoughttobehavingisabouttheirreconcilabilityofdiversecorevalues.Itis
aboutwhetheronewouldratherbeeconomicallyequalbutculturallyuniformorculturallydiversebut
economicallystratified.Itisabouthowbesttostrikeabalanceofvaluesinarealworldwhereeconomic
equalityandculturaldiversitydonotgohandinhand.Theequality-differenceparadoxsuggeststhatthe
moreweleantowardstoleranceandmakingspaceforrobustculturaldiversitythemorewewillneedto
acceptthattherewillbeeconomicinequalitiesbetweenculturalgroupsbyvirtueofthedifferencesin
theirlifestyles,thewaytheyraisetheirchildrenandwhattheythinkisofvalue;andthemorewetryto
makeallfactionsorculturalgroupsequallyskilledandfinanciallywelloffintheDavosworldeconomic
forumsensethemorewewillerodethoseinstitutions(suchasthefreedomofparentstocontrolthe
educationoftheirchildren)thatkeepusdiverse.Unfortunatelythatisnottheconversationweare
having.Inourideologicallydividedsocietyitseemstobemucheasier(probablymoreprofitable,and
possiblymorefun)tojustcontinuetheculturewarsandengageinanoracularnationaldebateabout
thetruemeaningofnumericchangesinthedispersioncharacteristicsofahighlyaggregatedincome
distributiononthecomputerscreen(SeeFigure1).Butthatisalongwayfromtherealitiesofthe
poorestcommunityinAmericaorthelessonswemightlearnaboutwhatisrealandwhatisunrealin
currentdebatesaboutincomeinequalityandtheimplicationsofeconomicinequalityforsocialcohesion
inamulticulturalsocietysuchastheUnitedStates.
“IfitwerenotfortheBritish,Indiawouldstillbealandofbarbarians.”
Mysecondexampleisnotafraughtandprovocativemorally-loadednormativecomparisonacross
periodsoftimeinthehistoryofanincomedistribution.Insteaditconcernstheinvidiousmoralmapping
14
ofwaysoflife.Asnotedearlierthistypeofnormativecomparativeviewgoesinandoutoffashionin
theacademicworldandmainstreammedia:InduringtheheydayofBritishandFrenchcolonial
expansiononehundredyearsagowhenmanyEuropeansactedasiftheyweretheChosenPeople
bringingthelightontoothers;outduringthewaningyearsofEuropeancolonialismandthewaxingof
nationalindependencemovementsinAsiaandAfrica;butbackagainwithavengeancesincethefallof
theWallin1989andtheriseofthe“EndofHistory”thinkingamongtheAnglicizedandFrancophile
cosmopolitanelitesoftheworld.Thistypeof“Westisbest”(anditswayswilleventuallyspread
throughouttheworld)thinkingisespeciallymanifestwhen,asImentioned,theconversationturnsto
thetopicsofgenderandglobalfeminism,asforexampleindiscussionsofsexselectiveabortioninIndia,
whichisaspecificexampleofnormativecomparativeanalysisuponwhichIshallfocus.
AccordingtothatparticularmoralmappingtheIndiansub-continentisaplacewhereviolenceagainst
womenrunssodeepinthelocalculturethateventhewombofIndianmothersisadangerousplacefor
afemalefetus.Asnotedearlier,thepracticethusgetsinterpretedasameasureofthebackwardnessof
thatancientcivilizationcomparedtomodernWesterncivilization.Howwelldoesthatnormative
comparisonstanduptoanalysis?Isittrueandjust,orisitinvidious?
IbelievedispassionatecomparativeanalysisactuallysuggeststhatMotherIndiadoesabetterjobthan
UncleSamatkeepingthewombsafeforgirls?Howcanthisbeso,giventhewidelypublicizeddepiction
ofabortiondecisionsinIndiaasatacticinaculturalwaragainstwomen?
“MissingGirls”
Firstsomebackground.Eversincetheinitialreportsofamonstrousgangrapeofayoungwomanin
NewDelhiin2012theglobalmediahasbeenrelentlessinitsdisparagementofgenderrelationsonthe
sub-continent.MuchofthecoverageinterpretsthebrutalcriminalactasasymbolofSouthAsian
culturalmisogyny.Journalists,bloggersandletterwritershavenotonlyfeltfreetodefameMother
Indiaforeverythingfromhersocialnormsconcerningfemalecomportmentinpublicspaces,toher
customaryfamilyandstatusrelatedconstraintsawoman’schoiceintheselectionofamarriagepartner,
toreportsofsexualabuseintheextendedjointfamily,tobrideburningsandkitchendeathsattributed
toinsufficientdowrygifting.Oneofthebarbarismsonehearsmuchaboutissexselectiveabortion.
Accordingtothisdepiction,SouthAsianparentsdon’tlikegirlsandseektogetridofthembymeansof
prenatalgenderdetectiondevicesandsubsequentelectiveabortion,whichisasourceof“missinggirls”
intheIndianpopulationandameasureofthebackwardnessofthatancientcivilizationwhenitcomes
totheprotectionofwomen.
Thereisoneprettyfundamentalproblemwiththisparticularhorrorinducingpictureofthehazardsof
thewombforHinduandMuslimgirlsinIndia.Itdoesnotstandupwelltocriticalcomparativeanalysis.
Question:Inwhichcountryisafemalefetusatgreaterriskforherlifeduetoanelectiveabortion–India
ortheUnitedStates?Answer:Atleastwithrespecttotheriskofbecomingamissingpersonduetoan
electiveabortionthewombisasaferplaceforfemalefetusesinIndiathaninmostcountriesofthe
world,includingtheUnitedStates.Howcanthisbeso?
15
Theobvious(butoftenoverlooked)answeristhatelectiveabortionsinIndiaarerelativelyrare
comparedtotheUnitedStates,evenifstronglysexselectiveundertheratherspecialcircumstances
associatedwiththeiroccurrence.Iwillhavemoretosayaboutthosespecialcircumstancesina
moment.Butfirstlet’scomparetheriskofanelectiveabortionforfemalefetusesinIndiaandthe
UnitedStates.TheelectiveabortionrateinIndiaisapproximately3%.Thisislowcomparedtomost
countries.BywayofcontrasttheelectiveabortionrateintheUnitedStatesisapproximately22%.(The
averageglobalrateis26%andtherearecountriesintheworldwhereover50%ofpregnanciesare
voluntaryterminated).Consequently,despitedifferentialfertilityrates(higherinIndia)andamassive
differenceinpopulationsize(India’sisfourtimesgreater)therearetwiceasmanyabortionsannuallyin
theUnitedStates(approximately1,200,000peryear)thaninIndia(approximately600,000peryear).
Demographerswhostudypopulationdynamicstalkabout“missinggirls”intheIndianpopulationdueto
electiveabortions.Whetherintendedornot,thistypeofmorallysuggestivelanguageinvitesustothink
abouttheIndianfetusasapersoninjeopardyofaparticulartypeofharm,namelythedenialofits
rightstorepresentationinthegeneralpopulationasdefinedandsurveyedbydemographers.Astudy
publishedinTheLancet(http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS01406736%2811%2960649-1/abstract)suggeststhat4,500,000isacautiousestimateofthetotalnumberof
Indianfemaleswhoaremissingfromthegeneralpopulationduetoelectiveabortionoverthefirst
decadeofthe21stcentury(2001-2011).
WhatwouldtheresultsbeifwetriedtoestimatethenumberofmissinggirlsintheUnitedStatesover
thatsameperiodoftime,relyingonreadilyavailabledemographicfactsconcerningelectiveabortions?
Hereonestartswiththeassumptionthatforthemostpartelectiveterminationsofapregnancyinthe
UnitedStatesaresexblindandequalopportunityoccasionsgovernedbynormsofgenderindifference.
Consequentlyitseemsreasonabletoassumethatinnearlyfiftypercentofthecasesitisafemalefetus
whoselifewillbeterminated.Sixmillionisacautiousestimateofthetotalnumberoffemalefetuses
whowereabortedbetween2001and2011intheUnitedStates.
Thosenumbersinvitetwoconclusions.First,ifyouallowyourselftoadopttheperspectiveofafemale
fetus(apotentialmissinggirl)theoverallriskofhavingyourlifeterminatedbyanelectiveabortionisfar
greaterintheUnitedStatesthaninIndia.Secondly,ifyoureallybelievethatabortingafemalefetusisa
formofviolenceagainstwomenthenthereisfarmoreofthattypeofviolenceintheUnitedStatesthan
inIndia.InthatregardthecustomsofMotherIndiaprovidebetterprotectiontogirlsthandothe
customsofUncleSam.
Suchconclusionsareprovocative.Iimaginemostreaderswillgrantthatadecisionbyamothertoabort
afetusismorelikelyintheUnitedStatesthanIndia.And,uponamoment’sreflection,itbecomes
evidentthatasaconsequenceofthediscrepancybetweena22%abortionrate(ofwhichalmost50%of
abortedfetusesarefemale)anda3%abortionrate(ofwhichmostarefemale)femalesfetusesareat
greaterriskofhavingtheirlifevoluntarilyendedintheUnitedStatesthaninIndia.(Ihopeitgoes
withoutsayingthatmalefetusestooareatgreaterriskintheUnitedStatesthaninIndia,andthemale
abortionriskdifferentialbetweentheUnitedStatesandIndiaisgreaterthanthefemaleabortionrisk
differential;AmericanmalefetusesaremuchmorelikelytogomissingthantheirIndiancounterparts).
16
Nevertheless,theglobalmoralmapofgenderrelationspublicizedbythemediaeversincethedreadful
crimeinNewDelhihasnotfeaturedMotherIndiaasapatronGoddessprotectingfemalefetusesfrom
harm.Moreover,giventhepopularityofthereceivedimageofIndianwomenasvictimsofcultural
misogynyitwouldnotbesurprisingifthereaderwasalreadyskepticalinthefaceofthecurrent
challenge.
Onecanimaginethefollowingobjection.Whileitisinstructivetolearnthatabortionsarerelativelyrare
eventsinIndia,theprincipleofgenderindifferenceisaself-evidentmoraltruththatoughttobe
universallybindingwhendecidingwhichparticularpregnancytoterminate.Evenifonly3%ofpregnant
Indianfemalesengageinsexselectiveabortion,thosewhodosoareengaginginviciousgender
discriminationexpressiveofapervasiveculturalhatredofwomen,whichIndianwomenthemselves
havebeenculturallyconditionedtoperpetuate.Thecrimeistheirculture.
Montaigne’sWisdom:BeSlowtoJudgeLittleKnownOthers
InofferingaresponsetothisretortIamgoingtofollowtheadviceofferedtoposteritybythegreat16th
centuryironistMichelDeMontaigneinhisfamousessay“OntheBarbarians.”
(http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/world_civ/worldcivreader/world_civ_reader_2/montaigne.html)
Montaigne,whowroteduringanearlierageofWesterninterventionsintothelivesofalienpeoples,was
reluctanttoletthecosmopolitanelitesofhisowneramaketheworldsafeforEuropeancondescension.
HedesignedhisessayasamirrorinthefaceofwhichhisRenaissancereadersmightnotice,andreflect
on,theuncivilizedqualitiesintheirownwayoflifeandbemorecircumspectintheirjudgmentsabout
“thebarbarians.”
Montaigne’stake-homemessageslaterbecamestandardrecommendationsforresearchersincultural
anthropology.Whenjudgingotherculturesbewareoftheillusoryairofmoralsuperioritythatso
naturallyarisesasyouinvestthepopularacceptancesofyourownsocietywithstrongsentimentand
experiencethemasfamiliarandhenceself-evidenttruths.Rushingtojudgmentcanbehazardous.Be
slowtodemonizethewayoflifeoflittleknownothers.Distinguishfactsfromfactoids.Trytoseethe
worldfromthenativepointofview.Bracketyourownimpulsiveemotionalreactions.Haveacloser
lookbeforearrivingatstrongmoralconclusions.
Takingacloserlook,whatarethespecialcircumstancesassociatedwithsexselectiveabortionsinIndia?
Whoarethe3%?Whataretheythinking?Whydotheydoit?UnlikeIndia,thevastmajorityofelective
abortionsintheUnitedStatesresultfromchoicesmadebyunmarriedwomen.Theychosetoaborttheir
pregnancybecausetheydonotwanttodisruptthepatternoftheirpersonallives(includingtheir
commitmentstoworkandschool);orbecausetheyfeeltheycan’taffordtohaveachild;orsimply
becausetheywanttodelayfamilyformationorneverformafamilyatall.
ThecircumstancesarequitedifferentinIndiaandspecialintheirownway.Localcontextmatters.The
3%ofpregnantwomenwhoelecttoterminatetheirpregnancyaretypicallymarriedmotherswhoare
deeplyembeddedinfamilylifeandwhoalreadyhaveoneortwodaughters.Itisahighlysignificantfact
thatabortionsinIndia,relativelyinfrequentastheyare,areNOTsexselectiveforfirstbornchildren?
Andifthatfirstbornchildisamalethereisnosexselectionforthesecondbornchildorforthethird
17
bornchild,either.Indianabortionsarenotmotivatedbyageneralhatredofwomen.Gettingridofgirls
isnotaculturalcustom,anymorethangettingridofchildrenisaculturalcustomintheUnitedStates
withits22%genderindifferentabortionrate.Indeedfemalesareworshiped,honoredandempowered
inmanycontextsinIndiansociety.
ItistruethatingeneralIndianwomenwouldprefertohaveatleastoneson.Inthatrespecttheyare
justlikemanymenandwomeninEuropeandtheUnitedStates.UnlikemostwomeninEuropeandthe
UnitedStatesthosefewwomeninIndiawhodoabortafetusaretryingtohavesomecontroloverthat
outcomeforthesakeofthewell-beingoftheentirefamily(itsfemalesandmales).Inthatrespectthey
arecorporateorcommunalintheiraspirations,andprimarilyconcernedaboutthewelfareofthe
patrimonyofwhichtheyareapartandinwhichtheyplayacrucialpart.
ForamarriedIndianwomanwhoisembeddedinathickfamilylifeandhasalreadygivingbirthtooneor
twodaughterstheaggregatewelfareeffectsofhavingatleastonesoncanbesubstantial.Thereare
effectsonone’sfinancialabilitytoarrangeasuitableandstatuspreservingmarriageforthegirlsinthe
family.Thereareeffectsonone’sabilitytobeanancestralguardianandperpetuatorofthekinship
groupandfamilyline.Therearepotentialeffectsonthemotherherself,who,giventhenatureand
detailsofresidence,kinshipaffiliationandgroupformationinIndiaissomewhatmorelikelytobe
dependentonhersonsratherthanherdaughtersforcare,protectionandshelterinoldage.
Andwhoarethe3%?UnliketheUnitedStateswherethereisatendencyforabortionstobemore
commonamongthosewhoarepoor,inIndiawomenwhoterminateapregnancytendtoberelatively
well-educated,financiallywell-offurbaniteswhohaveembracedthecosmopolitanvaluesoffamily
planningandpopulationcontrol,andhaveacceptedthemessageoftheubiquitousIndianfamily
planningposterswhichidealizeafourpersonnuclearfamilyconsistingofamother,afather,adaughter
andason.Inotherwords,the3%whoelecttoterminateapregnancyinIndiaaremembersofthe
emergingurbanmiddleclasswhofeelempoweredbypro-choiceandfamilyprivacyvaluestomakeuse
ofmoderntechnologiestoexerciseparentalcontrolovertheirreproductivelife.
TheremaybewisdominMontaigne’sadviceforfeministorganizations.Drawingmoralmapsofthe
culturesoftheworldandseekingtobealightuntoallothersisariskybusiness.Ifthemirroronthewall
tellsyou“youarethebestofthemall”insistonawaitingperiodbeforearrivingatstrongandemotionladenmoraljudgmentsaboutthegenderrelationsofothers.ManyfeministsintheUnitedStatesinsist
thatthefetusisnotaperson,whetherfemaleormale;andeversincethe1973RoevWadeSupreme
CourtdecisionafetusintheUnitedStates,whetherfemaleormale,doesnothaveeitheranindividual
rightoragender-basedgrouprighttorepresentationinthegeneralpopulation.Mostfeminist
organizationsareadvocatesof“familyprivacy,”“doctor-clientconfidentiality”and“freedomofchoice”
withregardtoterminatingapregnancy,asamI,andwouldrejecttheideathatanabortionisaformof
violenceagainstthefetus,whetherfemaleormale.Presumablytheywouldrejectaswellanysweeping
disparagementofAmericanculturewhichinterpretedthe22%abortionratewithitsnormofgender
indifferenceasexpressiveofanAmericanculturalhatredofchildren.
18
AllthatchangeswhenthefeministgazeturnsitsattentiontotheIndianwomb.Allofasuddenthefetus
(oratleast,orperhapsonly,thefemalefetus)becomesapersonandfeministorganizationsembracea
pro-lifepolicyagendademonizingandcriminalizingtheactivitiesofdoctorswhoarepreparedtoassist
pregnantIndianwomenwhowishtoexercisefreedomofchoiceintheserviceofthewelfareoftheir
families.IntheeyesofsomeIndianwomenandtheirdoctorsthatappearanceofhypocrisyseemsquite
real.
References
Alesina,Alberto,Glaeser,Edward,andSacerdote,Bruce(2001)WhyDoesn’ttheUSHaveAEuropeanStyleWelfareState?HarvardInstituteofEconomicResearchDiscussionPaper1933
Auerbach,AlanJ.,Kotlikoff,LawrenceJ.,andKoehler,Darryl(22016)U.S.Inequality,FiscalProgressivity,
andWorkDisincentives:AnIntragenerationalAccounting
Bryan,KevinA.andMartinez,Leonardo(2008)OntheEvolutionofIncomeInequalityintheUnited
States94:97-120.
Fischer,DavidH.(1989)Albion’sSeed:FourBritishFolkwaysinAmerica.NewYork:OxfordUniversity
Press.
Furchtgott-Roth,Diana(2014)(Ed.)(2014)IncomeInequalityinAmerica:FactandFiction.E21Issue
Brief,EconomicPoliciesforthe21stCenturyattheManhattanInstitute.
Jindra,Michael(2014)TheDilemmaofEqualityandDiversity,CurrentAnthropology55:316-334.
Meyers,DavidN.andStolzenberg,NomiM.(2011)KiryasJoel:TheocracyinAmerica?HuffingtonPost,
December4,2011.
Minow,Martha,Shweder,RichardA.andMarkus,Hazel(Eds.)(2008)JustSchools:PursuingEqualityin
SocietiesofDifference.NewYork:RussellSageFoundationPress.
Piketty,Thomas(2014)CapitalintheTwenty-FirstCentury.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress.
Putnam,Robert(2007)EPluribusUnum:DiversityandCommunityintheTwenty-FirstCentury,The
JohanSkytteLecture,ScandinavianPoliticalStudies30:137-174.
Roberts,Sam(2011)AVillagewiththeNumbers,NottheImage,ofthePoorestPlace.NewYorkTimes,
April20,2011.
Saez,EmmanuelandPiketty,Thomas(2003)IncomeInequalityintheUnitedStates.QuarterlyJournal
ofEconomic118:1-39.
Shweder,RichardA.(2008)AfterJustSchools:TheEquality-DifferenceParadoxandConflictingVarieties
ofLiberalHope,InMarthaMinow,RichardA.ShwederandHazelMarkus(Eds.),JustSchools:Pursuing
EqualityinSocietiesofDifference.NewYork:RussellFoundationPress.Pps.254-290.
19
Shweder,RichardA.,Minow,Martha,andMarkus,Hazel(Eds.)(2000)TheEndofTolerance:Engaging
CulturalDifferences,Daedalus:JournaloftheAmericanAcademyofArtsandSciences,FallIssue2000.
Shweder,RichardA,Minow,Martha,andMarkus,Hazel(Eds.)(2002)EngagingCulturalDifferences:The
MulticulturalChallengeinLiberalDemocracies.NewYork:RussellSageFoundationPress.
20
Figure1.