Cheating Without Knowing It

The judge was about to pro­nounce sentence upon the con­victed confidence man. "You should be ashamed to cheat those who trust you," he admonished.

"But, Judge," came the re­sponse, "who else can I cheat?"

Most of us presumably know the rewards of serving rather than cheating those who trust us. How many times this very day have you served others to obtain what you wanted from them? Did you not buy or sell some commodity or service — thus serving a trusted and trusting friend? Did it occur to you to cheat, even if dealing with a stranger who might not know whether to trust you?

Presumably, we know it is wrong to cheat and know why it is wrong. The something he gains through fraud is subtracted from the character of the cheater; it degrades him. To cheat another is to cheat oneself in the process.

To cheat knowingly is serious enough; but perhaps worse is to cheat without knowing it, for this leaves less chance of catching the culprit and correcting the prob­lem.

Did I cheat today? Perhaps without knowing it? Let’s ap­proach this difficult question from another direction: Was I cheated today? Reflecting on my various purchases at the barber shop, res­taurant, grocery store, service station, it seems unlikely. These friends surely would not cheat me, nor would I knowingly cheat them. As far as I know, these sup­pliers held clear title to their wares, delivering them to me as represented and unencumbered by other claims. Likewise, the money or whatever else I willingly gave in exchange was mine and now is theirs — entirely acceptable for their own use or as a medium for further exchange. We traded because each of us wanted to, each gaining something more valuable to him at the time than the prop­erty he relinquished. And we will express our mutual satisfaction through similar transactions to­morrow or next week or next month or whenever the need arises. But not if one of us thought the other had cheated. In that case, the one injured might seek restitution or take his busi­ness elsewhere — probably both. To continue to trade with one who cheats would be to work for noth­ing; and most of us are allergic to work on those terms!

Some persons, of course, are allergic to work on any terms; and this may tempt such a person to try to cheat. An employee, for instance, might "soldier" on the job, producing far less than he could or should in return for his wage. A butcher with a heavy thumb, a short-change artist at the cash register, trash in the bottom of the basket, rocks in the coal, checks that bounce, building lots under water or inaccessible to water, counterfeit currency —plenty of ways to cheat if one wants to try. But it’s no way to build a steady business with sat­isfied customers. There’s no great future in it. And perhaps this ex­plains why most of us rarely en­counter such fraudulent practices in our daily affairs.

Possibly we may conclude that none of us knowingly cheated to­day. And how very nice for all of us! But let’s have one final check before closing the books on this knotty problem.

The New School Building

What of the gathering this eve­ning in the home of a neighbor to discuss plans for the new $6,000,000 high school? Any cheating going on there? These are good neighbors, hard-working, God-fearing, helpful and friendly people, none of whom would think of cheating. They will carefully discuss the importance of educa­tion for all children in the grow­ing community. Some will recall the amounts by which school-taxes have risen over the past ten years; they will understand that the new school means a 10 per cent tax increase next year and probably for many years to come. They will conscientiously review the facts and circumstances, each trying to decide how to vote in the coming school election.

But will it occur to any one of them that such a collective deci­sion-making process, the results of which are to be binding upon every taxpayer in the district, might be something like cheating? What of the young Jones couple who had counted on that extra $50 of school-taxes to help defray the costs of an operation for the baby? Or the elderly Smith couple, barely able now to maintain their modest home and cover the other necessities of life? Or the hun­dreds of other needs other fami­lies in the school district face that to them might seem more urgent at the moment than a $6,000,000 new high school and the attendant costs for operation and perpetual care?

True, everyone will have had an opportunity to be heard, a chance to vote. But in the final analysis, some will be compelled to buy educational facilities which they neither want nor can afford. And the compulsion will have been applied by their friendly, kindly, well-meaning neighbors who con­sider education to be one of the proper functions of the police power.1

Public Housing

Perhaps it calls for too harsh a judgment upon one’s most inti­mate friends to conclude that they are cheating when they compel others to help build the schools that some believe to be needed.

That such action involves cheating surely must be a minority point of view in most communities, if it is believed at all. Nevertheless, it may serve to illustrate the pos­sibility of our cheating without realizing it. If we were to use such tactics to compel the Mor­mons of our community to help build Sunday school facilities in the local Presbyterian church, many persons would think we were cheating.

Good Presbyterians, of course, would never do such a thing! Those concerned would pledge their own resources to build and operate their own church school. But what of the proposal con­sidered this evening by the ruling elders: Should the Presbyterian church join other churches of the community in support of the In­terfaith Housing Corporation? Any cheating here? Certainly not on the surface, at least. The church pays $25.00 a year to be­come a voting member of the cor­poration — no strings attached or other obligations. The purpose of the corporation is to alleviate the shortage of low-rent housing, es­pecially for families of minority groups some of whom may be dis­placed by a proposed new high­way. Surely a project worthy of the cooperation of the various re­ligious groups in the community! But what is a thoughtful Christian to do when he later discovers that the Interfaith Housing Cor­poration is simply a front to re­quest Federal funds for housing to be built, not voluntarily by con­cerned individuals and religious groups of the community, but by the coercive procedures of the tax collector and the police power? Isn’t it something like cheating to compel someone else to carry out one’s own charitable impulse?

Organized Violence

To cross a union picket line, either to fill a vacated job or to buy goods or services from the besieged supplier — or to actively question the propriety of a stu­dent sit-in or campus demonstra­tion — is thought by many to be a form of cheating. It is to be a "scab," "strike-breaker," "Uncle Tom" — at the very least, a "square." But how can it logically be anything but cheating when men organize to prevent others from performing essential ser­vices which they themselves re­fuse to perform? It is, or used to be, considered cheating to copy another student’s answer on a quiz and claim credit for it as one’s own. But isn’t it also a form of cheating on the part of any or­ganized group of students when they attempt by force or threat of force to foreclose an institution of learning or some part of it from use by other students and by faculty members wishing to en­gage in the peaceful pursuit of knowledge? Are we not cheating others if we deny them, in whole or in part, the use of their faculties or their property for any peaceful purpose they might choose?

The ways in which man may cheat are perhaps infinite. Even a tiny child, when he puts his mind to it, will baffle many an adult. And among adults are experts at the art of deception. But it is not the diverse and deliberate efforts of unorganized individuals to ob­tain something for nothing that most seriously concern us. This is not our real problem. By and large, we may and we must trust one another to behave as best each knows how.

The form of cheating most harmful to us as individuals and as a society occurs when we hide in a majority and quite thought­lessly act to achieve our ends at the expense of somebody else.’- We heedlessly authorize the govern­ment to do for us what we could never, in serious contemplation, bring ourselves to do on our own. Thus does one become the victim of his own irresponsibility, cheat­ing without knowing it, and cheat­ing himself most of all.

—FOOTNOTES—

1 The value of education or need for it are not at issue here — only the methods used. The case for voluntary rather than compulsory schooling is discussed at length in the book, Anything That’s Peaceful by Leonard E. Read. (Irving­ton-on-Hudson, N.Y.: The Foundation for Economic Education, 1964), pp. 180-221.

² See "The American System and Ma­jority Rule" by Edmund A. Opitz, THE FREEMAN, November, 1962, pp. 28-39.