Oppression, the 4th of July and Kelo

The Fourth of July may be a difficult holiday for those with pacifist tendencies. Not the least of the bad practices associated with independence day is the American tendency to define oppression downwards. Might Americans have been better off forming an independent nation in 1776. Of course. But whether the level of injustice justified shooting a lot of people strikes me as dubious, at best. And worse, when we teach our children that conditions in 1776 were so oppressive as to justify violence, they are inclined to think of oppression indiscriminately.

Consider the recent Kelo case, the one in which a narrow Supreme Court majority declared that localities could condemn land for economic redevelopment. Cries of oppression have gone up from the opposition. Lost in the debate have been two simple facts. First, the compensation paid to the homeowners was substantially more than their houses and land were worth on the market. Second, the vast majority of the homeowners voluntarily took the deal, preferred to buy bigger homes or homes in better neighborhoods to remaining where they were. So much for the nonsense in Justice Thomas's dissent about the policy being racist, when it turns out that the vast majority of persons of color living in the relevant neighborhood were pleased that the government paid a premium for the land and houses. Now, it may be unconstitutional for the government to do this or to require all homeowners to accept the deal (though the constant claim that they wanted to preserve their neighborhoods is, again, utter nonsense, since almost all of the neighbors preferred the government deal). Still, it is not oppressive for government to require people to sell land at above market prices when the vast majority of the neighborhood thinks they are getting a good deal.