idea: textbook swap
originally written 08.08.2002
got in a discussion with erin and jason about the ethics of stealing textbooks. i don’t do it, but reading a lot of anarchist propaganda, i’ve come to realize how easy it would be to do so. so, if the deterrent of getting caught isn’t there, why shouldn’t i steal? well, jason and erin argue that there are negative side effects to stealing, e.g. student workers losing their jobs because of lack of profits. but, one person stealing books, they agree, will not cause any negative impact. the problem comes, they say, if everyone were to steal books. the reality, however, is that for one reason or another, not everyone is stealing books. if it every became a problem, then it would no longer be ethical (as i will argue below), for someone to steal as many books, or to steal them at all. such assumptions miss the point however – right now, there is enough excess in the textbook industry to support some degree of theft with few (no?) negative repercussions, particularly to those who are least able to handle the impact of such repercussions.
so, is stealing textbooks unethical? what i argue is that the cost of education, particularly in ohio, is unfairly high. efforts to lobby the state for more funding have thus far been inneffective. though such efforts should not be abandoned, one must ask the question, is there a means to mitigate the unfair social system of funding of higher education. the answer is yes – in one case, stealing textbooks. essentially, stealing textbooks, to a very small degree, provides a redistribution of educational costs from the student, to society at large, and, arguably to those who are most able to pay for it. if i steal a textbook, this reduces the total profit that the company makes (and if it is done within the threshold of excess, it had no other implications). compare this with a more systematic reduction of total education costs. for the state to increase funding, they would have to raise additional revenue. this would most likely be done through taxes. a fair tax would tax those most able to absorb it the most – that is large businesses who make a lot of profit. seeing as the textbook industry seems to be flourishing in columbus, arguably this industry would see some reduction of profit, even with a more systematic lowering of educational costs. the bottom line, is that the end result of theft and systematic change are the same. the argument is not whether one is a better method of achieving desireable results than the other, but why any possible steps to exact positive change are not taken.
what i argue is that it is the results of the theft that dictate ethics, not the act itself. i think that traditional values of property protection, being held over that of general welfare and mutual benefit create an unfair stigma against certain paths of action, even if their end result is beneficial. to reenforce this, let’s consider other ways that i (and other individuals) could reduce the costs of education, within the narrow contexts of the textbook market. i could, as i have done in my history class, check out the textbook from the library. the bookstore is still loosing profit, and as erin argued with theft, i am still taking advantage of people as she would see it – those people who chose not to also try to check out the book from the library. is there any reason why this approach is more or less ethical than theft? as i see it, the answer is no – the results are the same.
let’s look at another example. a loosely organized textbook swap where instead of selling back their textbooks, students simply give their unneeded books to other students. even if one student does this, the textbook industry is still losing the same amount of money as if that student had stolen a textbook (asssuming that there is a surplus of used textbooks, which i think is generally a fair assumption). is this textbook swap, therefore, unethical? furthermore, consider a larger-scale textbook swap between many students. given the logistical difficulties and the potential consequences for theft, it can be argued that more students would participate in the textbook swap. the implications of a large textbook swap are significant reductions in the cost of education for students, as well as significant reductions in the profits for the textbook industry. it could be argued that if students swapped books on a large scale, it could impact the industry enough to result in the loss of student jobs. in this case, given that a huge number of students could participate with no consequence, in terms of side-effects for innocent textbook industry employees, the textbook swap is more unethical than theft (which could only be sustained by a smaller number of participants). of course even students layed off as a result of a large-scale textbook swap would still benefit from the ability to get textbooks for free.
so, my argument is that the ethics of a given course of action are dictated by the net total result alone. the fact that the debate is clouded to the extent that a textbook swap is not seen as ethical or unethical as textbook theft reenforces another point i tried to make in my discussion with erin/jason – that social structures can limit one’s perspectives for exacting positive social change on a small scale. by looking beyond what is socially and legally accepted, one can expand the opportunities for undoing injustice and improving the general welfare.
a model for a textbook swap:kiss – keep it simple stupid, a phrase that my grandfather, an professor of engineering, once related to me. at the end of each school term, a small group of people collects textbooks from students asking the students to provide the group with the course associated with the textbook to ease processing. at the beginning of the next term, students can collect textbooks. ask for a simple printout of their course schedule to verify that they are actually taking the course, and to prevent rampant abuse. otherwise, require no other stipulations. this entire process could easily be administrated by one of the numerous student service organizations that are on every single college campus in the entire world
a more complicated model: some would argue that the above system allows for too much abuse. people could sell back textbooks after they borrow them for a profit. i’m not sure if this is that great of a problem. by selling back books, they reduce the general availabilty of books and undermine the system. this means that the potential for that individual to further gain free textbooks is reduced. even if they make a few bucks selling back a swapped book, they will lose in the long run when they have to pay for books because the swapping system has failed. however, to prevent against this sort of thing, it would be easy enough to write software to keep a database of books and users and to simply check books out and in after every term, making phone calls to track down those who haven’t returned their books and blacklisting those who won’t return the book. alternately, textbooks for current college courses could be put in a special section of the college library that allows for term-length checkout rather than the normal checkout period.