It is a peaceful and serene Sunday morning in Northern Virginia. As I sat reflecting, I happened upon a video by Ben Shapiro in which he argued that we must stop “punishing success.” He remarked that figures like Zohran Mamdani or Hasan Piker are less concerned with genuinely uplifting the poor than with seeing the wealthy brought low.
This immediately brought to mind Margaret Thatcher’s enduring observation: critics of inequality often “would rather that the poor were poorer, provided that the rich were less rich.” That insight cuts directly to the heart of the redistribution debate.
It is widely understood that even if a government were to seize and divide all wealth equally, disparities would re-emerge almost immediately. Some would spend what they received, others would give it away, and still others would invest it and multiply it. The result is not accidental — it is the predictable outcome of differences in judgment, discipline, ambition, and willingness to take risks.
This is the uncomfortable truth: in a free society, inequality is not merely imposed; it is continually generated by human behavior itself. Attempts to forcibly erase it do not create justice — they distort incentives and penalize the very qualities that produce growth in the first place. Redistribution, particularly when coercive, does not reward virtue; it punishes initiative, foresight, and hard work while privileging consumption over creation.
Compulsory redistribution does more than reshuffle resources — it corrodes the very foundations of prosperity. When success is treated as a problem to be corrected rather than a standard to be emulated, the incentive to innovate, to build, and to strive inevitably weakens. Over time, the pattern is clear: productivity declines, investment retreats, and the engine of economic advancement stalls.
By contrast, societies that prioritize economic and political freedom consistently generate greater prosperity. When individuals are free to pursue opportunity, to emulate success rather than resent it, and to retain the rewards of their efforts, the result is not merely personal advancement but broad-based societal progress. The United States remains the clearest modern example of this principle in action.
As the nation approaches its 250th anniversary, it is worth reflecting on what that freedom has made possible. Much of the modern world now enjoys conveniences that would have been unimaginable in earlier generations, many of them shaped or accelerated by American ingenuity. From the steel plow and advances in surgical anesthesia to the airplane — and later breakthroughs such as the computer, the internet, the smartphone, and artificial intelligence — these innovations did not emerge from systems focused on leveling outcomes or constraining success.
Other inventions, including the automobile and household technologies like the sewing and washing machines, became widely accessible through a distinctly American emphasis on practicality and scale. Together, they arose from a culture that rewards ingenuity, risk-taking, and ambition.
It is difficult — if not impossible — to imagine such breakthroughs arising from a system driven by resentment or enforced equality rather than aspiration and creative drive.
In the end, prosperity is not built by pulling down the successful, but by enabling others to rise. “A rising tide lifts all boats” — but only when the tide itself is free to rise.
Nora D. Clinton is a Research Scholar & Project Manager at the Legal Insurrection Foundation. She was born and raised in Sofia, Bulgaria. She holds a PhD in Classics and has published extensively on ancient documents on stone. In 2020, she authored the popular memoir Quarantine Reflections Across Two Worlds. Nora is a co-founder of two partner charities dedicated to academic cooperation and American values. She lives in Northern Virginia with her husband and son.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY