The “Greater Good” Myth Ends Here.
Librarians seek to justify their government-issued privileges at a time of great technology-driven change, extreme levels of public debt and our recognition that TOO MUCH GOVERNMENT is a problem.
When collective and individual interests collide.
A classic battle between privileged public sector workers and private sector wealth producers has been waging since the rise of “the greater good” and “the public interest” forms of Marxist collectivism.
Many Special Interest Groups exist whose members perpetually lobby for access to the HONEY POT, the repository of money and legislative authority which its custodians use to favour “the privileged” for reciprocal benefits of comparable value. The is Cronyism in its purest form, funded by everyone except the beneficiaries.
Librarians versus Writers & Content Producers.
This podcast episode of Law Bytes features a discussion between host Michael Geist and guest Victoria Owen, a leading expert on copyright and libraries. She is the chair of the Canadian Federation of Library Associations (CLFA) copyright committee. Ms Owen discusses the CFLA’s purpose, the state of copyright law in Canada, and the significant content licensing by educational and library institutions.
At one point during this episode, Victoria expressed her frustration with authors who lobby the government to change Canada’s Copyright Act because they believe that the property rights and earnings from their work has been undermined unfairly. She states that libraries provide an essential service to “balance” of rights between creators and end users.
Ms Owen says that “librarians serve the public interest on behalf of the government”. When one author accused her of engaging in theft by using the author’s work in government institutions without fair compensation, she felt it thoroughly unjustified. Evidently, she doesn’t know how good she has it as a public servant.
Blind Privilege.
Some observations are worth making concerning government and non-government workers. People like Victoria Owen are often oblivious to the realities of others who are less privileged than herself.
Governments have a legislated monopoly on the use of force and coercion to make citizens comply with its rules and preferences. The Honey Pot makes this possible. Special interest groups act to exert pressure and influence on the custodians of the Honey Pot - the politicians and government officials - to secure favours.
Government workers enjoy job and income security because it is funded through the Honey Pot and backed by preferential legislation. They enjoy safe and comfortable working conditions, reliable payment of their wages and benefits, and the politically powerful support of labour unions to protect and defend both. By comparison, non-government workers face precarious employment in highly competitive markets in which the steady innovation of work processes must exist for business survival.
“Institutional bias” comes with “government privilege”. When your job is secure from the vagaries and pressures of market competition, your perspective is skewed as was evident with Victoria Owen.
The Digital Age is transforming the economy rapidly. It offers innovative ways to supply services to people in every sector. The private sector embraces and adapts to the opportunities that technology advances provides more rapidly that the public sector. There are few incentives to seek productivity improvement measures in government hierarchies because entrenched stakeholder interests would be threatened, and they can be counted upon to oppose change.
A Shift in Mindset
What if the notions of “the greater good” and “the public interest” were debunked and classified as misinformation and disinformation?
What if every adult in Canada were to wake up one morning to the realization that he or she is an individual human being who would henceforth choose ‘individual person and property rights’ ahead of any collectivist notion that government authorities enact and enforce?
In other words, what is the Freedom on Informed Choice was universally acknowledged as every citizen’s natural right under Canada’s implementation of a democratic civil society?
Offer individual choice - a natural solution.
Early in 2023, I published a ‘citizen white paper’ on Amazon Kindle entitled ‘Digital Direct Democracy - A Libertarian Antidote to Digital Communism.”
In it, I describe the online Citizen’s Preferences Directory (CPD), a digital platform which would enable every adult Canadian to opt-in or opt-out of specific government programs and their obligations. The technology for this application has existed for decades as everyone knows who banks online.
Several examples of how a CPD would work were provided. One applied to Climate Change: if you don’t belief it to be a serious enough issue to justify government action, then register this belief in the CPD and remove yourself from all carbon taxes and regulatory requirements.
The Library sector is another in which the online Citizen’s Preferences Directory (CPD) could apply.
In the Digital Age, citizens are awash with choices for consuming news and information, podcasts, social media, audio-visual content, streaming services, access to books, and more. If you are like me, and you don’t see any value in paying the wages and benefits for Librarians in public institutions, then you could register this choice in the CPD to secure your right to opt-out of those tax remissions for Librarians.
Why would I opt out?
The need for tax-funded full-time Librarians to curate our choices within this ocean of content no longer seems relevant. It may better “serve the public interest” to eliminate the cost overheads and tax implications of those permanent government positions.
It is more democratic to expect individual organizations, such as a school or museum, to hire a Librarian only on project-specific consulting engagements. These term assignments should take place on an ‘as needed’ basis and be justified on an expected ‘return on investment’ as every ‘for profit’ entrepreneur does.
Of course, this is a suggestion that requires analysis and planning. One significant advantage, however, is that Librarians would face a competitive market when seeking consulting engagements. They will quickly shed their “institutional bias” and sense of “government privilege” as they learn that their billing rate and demand for their services will be determined by reputation alone rather than by their seniority and the public bullying of labour union collective bargaining.
I, for one, would welcome this change to the profession of librarians in Canada.
I don't have a clear opinion on government funded librarians, as I have found them to be relatively harmless. They at least provide a useful function, and I imagine that there not many of them, and even fewer that make exorbitant salaries.
What concerns me more are activist trade unions representing government workers. Within the past month, unions like CUPE and the OFL have stated open support for both the SOGI agenda in Canadian schools, as well as the middle eastern terrorist group known as Hamas. I personally find this offensive, as the tax dollars of all Canadians, regardless of political outlook, are being used to fund initiatives that only a minority of Canadians would agree with. Unlike a business whose products and /or services can be boycotted if they were to fund such ideologies, the taxpayer has no opportunity to withdraw their financial support from these rogue agents.
I would venture to suggest that these union ideologues are in contravention of Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms (if that document is still in effect).