Giving Back to the Community
These days, celebrities often publicly announce that they’re “giving back to the community” when choosing to fund a particular charity. This overused phrase implicitly suggests that they have previously taken from the community. But how is this possible in a free market?
In a free market (laissez-faire capitalism), people exchange value for value. If a singer/producer/distribution company creates a recoding for which millions of people gladly pay $20, then no coercion or “taking” has occurred. If a basketball player inspires sports fans to attend games at the tune of $100 per seat, then again, no coercion or force has occurred. The celebrity creates wealth that previously didn’t exist, and trades it for wealth that others also created.
Perhaps the need to “give back” speaks about the psychology of the celebrities. Aside from simply using the phrase because they believe it to be some form of second handed altruistic morality, celebrities often do not understand their own value and thus don’t feel deserving of their wealth (and we all can think of examples of so called celebrities who don’t appear to create any value).
Unfortunately, their use of this phrase also implies that everyone who earns wealth in our (relatively) free society should also “give back.” Those who are envious of others’ earned wealth and any other Marxists will certainly champion this false idealism.
Unless people have gained their wealth through coercion or theft, all wealth earned in a free market rightly and justly belongs to the creators. There is no need to “give back” any part of it, for without their chosen activities, their wealth would have never existed in the first place.