Home » Opinion » Foreign Views
An American's critique of capitalism and false gods
By Greg Cusack |
May 10, 2011, Tuesday
|
Print Edition
Print Edition
ONCE again, Wan Lixin has written a powerful piece about the considerable downsides of consumer capitalism ("Oceans brim with trash as we glorify growth," Shanghai Daily, April 22).
His essay continues your paper's commendable ongoing emphasis on the consequence of human behavior for our beloved and much-abused planet.
Wan's words reminded me that Karl Marx's critique of capitalism remains insightful and valid. Especially prescient were Marx's predictions about the conundrum involved in the dynamics of the capitalist ethos which, unregulated by non-economic forces, are cumulatively destructive.
Capitalism:
1. Requires continual expansion.
2. Does not distinguish between essential and non-essential goods, or between necessities and luxuries.
3. Sees "quality" as less important than the price-point at which goods can be sold; consequently, there is a bias towards so-called "disposable" goods.
4. Does not inherently factor into profit/loss calculations any negative environmental consequences of its production processes.
5. Converts public goods (water, air, land) into private resources.
6. Results in income inequality (disproportionate returns to the "investor" and/or "owner").
7. Has an operative ethos that assumes its superiority over any governmental or ethical perspective.
Capitalism is more than "just" an economic system - it has become a new idol for many throughout the world.
In the Hebrew portion of the Bible (the Old Testament, pre-Jesus writings), the Israelites are frequently warned against worshiping "false idols." They are those things - not at all necessarily figures of wood or metal - in which we place our trust, on which we count on "when the going gets rough."
In discussions about economic issues in the United States, it is common to hear that we must "guard against interference in the market" as this will somehow distort its natural course (an assumption being that such natural course is always "good" for us).
We are counseled to keep "our hands off" market mechanisms, as the markets themselves wisely allocate goods and services according to "inherent supply and demand" signals.
The wealthy elite lecture us about how any attempt to steer or negate market activity is "unwise interference," and that any impact upon social and economic conditions is as "inevitable" as Darwin found the evolution of the species to be.
Those proposing regulating or channeling economic activity are worse than ignorant; undoubtedly "socialist" in viewpoint, such persons have the nefarious design to induce "class warfare" in order to achieve "widespread redistribution of wealth" from the assumed worthy to the unworthy.
On paper, this looks like absolute nonsense, which it is. But it is absolutely amazing how these "principles" have become articles of faith for an overwhelming number of American citizens.
How can this be? For the last 40 years, this mantra of a false "faith" has been steadily fed to citizens through politicians and media increasingly owned by the oligarchy now in effective control of the United States.
What, then, can be done? Is the situation hopeless?
If we who care about the world we are leaving to our children are to salvage our beloved planet from our current course, there are, I believe, two indispensable types of "controls" necessary.
Proposals
First, it is each person's responsibility as global citizen to return to those codes of interior ethics and right behavior which our respective cultures used to hold up as examples of wise living.
The Jewish prophets, the teachings of Jesus, the insights of the Buddha, and the wisdom of Confucius all held that each of us has a responsibility to ourselves and to each other in pursuing lives of harmony and peace.
By recognizing our own limitations as well as our mutual brotherhood, we should care for the less fortunate, nurture and preserve our lovely planet, and live simply and in peace with those about us.
I believe the economic consequence of such a moral orientation is seeking sufficiency in our lives, and abhorring surplus and waste. We must help each other refocus on what is really needed, and stop this senseless (and endless) pursuit of more.
Second, it is the obligation of our respective governments to consistently regulate and monitor those economic activities that negatively impact our environment, produce shoddy or useless things, or create economic, social, or political inequality.
Supported and encouraged by an ethically balanced citizenry, governments can direct capitalist efforts towards community-enhancing projects and defend our environment for the fruitful use and enjoyment of those who will follow us.
As Wan commented, "If we hope to leave our children more than an oversized trash heap, it is time responsible people woke up to the insanity of reckless growth."
Our current path worldwide is not sustainable; it allows a small minority to live in sumptuous (and obscene) surplus while millions of their fellow human beings struggle for each day' food and housing.
Our shared morality cries: STOP!
May we encourage, and learn from, each other in this urgent task!
(The author was a member of the Iowa state House of Representatives. He also served in the Iowan executive branch. He retired in 2004. His e-mail: gloster@iowatelecom.net.)
His essay continues your paper's commendable ongoing emphasis on the consequence of human behavior for our beloved and much-abused planet.
Wan's words reminded me that Karl Marx's critique of capitalism remains insightful and valid. Especially prescient were Marx's predictions about the conundrum involved in the dynamics of the capitalist ethos which, unregulated by non-economic forces, are cumulatively destructive.
Capitalism:
1. Requires continual expansion.
2. Does not distinguish between essential and non-essential goods, or between necessities and luxuries.
3. Sees "quality" as less important than the price-point at which goods can be sold; consequently, there is a bias towards so-called "disposable" goods.
4. Does not inherently factor into profit/loss calculations any negative environmental consequences of its production processes.
5. Converts public goods (water, air, land) into private resources.
6. Results in income inequality (disproportionate returns to the "investor" and/or "owner").
7. Has an operative ethos that assumes its superiority over any governmental or ethical perspective.
Capitalism is more than "just" an economic system - it has become a new idol for many throughout the world.
In the Hebrew portion of the Bible (the Old Testament, pre-Jesus writings), the Israelites are frequently warned against worshiping "false idols." They are those things - not at all necessarily figures of wood or metal - in which we place our trust, on which we count on "when the going gets rough."
In discussions about economic issues in the United States, it is common to hear that we must "guard against interference in the market" as this will somehow distort its natural course (an assumption being that such natural course is always "good" for us).
We are counseled to keep "our hands off" market mechanisms, as the markets themselves wisely allocate goods and services according to "inherent supply and demand" signals.
The wealthy elite lecture us about how any attempt to steer or negate market activity is "unwise interference," and that any impact upon social and economic conditions is as "inevitable" as Darwin found the evolution of the species to be.
Those proposing regulating or channeling economic activity are worse than ignorant; undoubtedly "socialist" in viewpoint, such persons have the nefarious design to induce "class warfare" in order to achieve "widespread redistribution of wealth" from the assumed worthy to the unworthy.
On paper, this looks like absolute nonsense, which it is. But it is absolutely amazing how these "principles" have become articles of faith for an overwhelming number of American citizens.
How can this be? For the last 40 years, this mantra of a false "faith" has been steadily fed to citizens through politicians and media increasingly owned by the oligarchy now in effective control of the United States.
What, then, can be done? Is the situation hopeless?
If we who care about the world we are leaving to our children are to salvage our beloved planet from our current course, there are, I believe, two indispensable types of "controls" necessary.
Proposals
First, it is each person's responsibility as global citizen to return to those codes of interior ethics and right behavior which our respective cultures used to hold up as examples of wise living.
The Jewish prophets, the teachings of Jesus, the insights of the Buddha, and the wisdom of Confucius all held that each of us has a responsibility to ourselves and to each other in pursuing lives of harmony and peace.
By recognizing our own limitations as well as our mutual brotherhood, we should care for the less fortunate, nurture and preserve our lovely planet, and live simply and in peace with those about us.
I believe the economic consequence of such a moral orientation is seeking sufficiency in our lives, and abhorring surplus and waste. We must help each other refocus on what is really needed, and stop this senseless (and endless) pursuit of more.
Second, it is the obligation of our respective governments to consistently regulate and monitor those economic activities that negatively impact our environment, produce shoddy or useless things, or create economic, social, or political inequality.
Supported and encouraged by an ethically balanced citizenry, governments can direct capitalist efforts towards community-enhancing projects and defend our environment for the fruitful use and enjoyment of those who will follow us.
As Wan commented, "If we hope to leave our children more than an oversized trash heap, it is time responsible people woke up to the insanity of reckless growth."
Our current path worldwide is not sustainable; it allows a small minority to live in sumptuous (and obscene) surplus while millions of their fellow human beings struggle for each day' food and housing.
Our shared morality cries: STOP!
May we encourage, and learn from, each other in this urgent task!
(The author was a member of the Iowa state House of Representatives. He also served in the Iowan executive branch. He retired in 2004. His e-mail: gloster@iowatelecom.net.)
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 沪ICP证：沪ICP备05050403号-1
- |
- 互联网新闻信息服务许可证：31120180004
- |
- 网络视听许可证：0909346
- |
- 广播电视节目制作许可证：沪字第354号
- |
- 增值电信业务经营许可证：沪B2-20120012
Copyright © 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
