Home » Opinion » Foreign Views
Asking the market: How much do we need?
By Greg Cusack |
April 22, 2010, Thursday
|
Print Edition
Print Edition
EDITOR'S note:
Although the author from America's heartland focuses on the ills of capitalism run amok in the US, his warnings against an unfettered free market and unlimited consumption are relevant to China and the rest of the world.
I found Mr Wan Lixin's recent articles (April 3, "Power prevails over the silent poor," and April 17, "Modern capitalism seeks ideal of soulless workers") to be, as usual, quite insightful.
Because of his and Mr Wang Yong's articles, I have begun studying China's long history. I envy China's tradition of respecting the insights of its ancient wisdom and teachings, and the connection they embody between the uprightness of each person with the larger welfare of the family and the society/state.
The United States, on the contrary, is a new country; we share less a developed code of moral thought than civic principles established in our Constitution. Our political thought is oriented around how governing power is to be shared, employed and contested.
Influenced by the Reformation and Enlightenment, our religious/moral tradition has been more likely to be focused on individual attainments and much less on a person's obligation to others in society. The driving engine of capitalism reciprocally influences our fierce code of individualism. This can create a moral and spiritual vacuum.
What passes for political discourse in the United States today is toxic: strident and angry voices exchange heated charges and accusations. There is little reasoning, almost no listening, and little examination of fundamental principles.
As someone who has devoted his adult life to public policy issues, I find this to be a very discouraging time. We seem unable to remember, let alone confront, those issues of fundamental importance for ordering a civil society.
In this very wealthy country (rich in natural resources and agricultural land) we often act toward each other as if we were poor. How can this be?
In part because our (over-) emphasis on individualism, coupled with the community-eroding effects of unleashed capitalism, has helped create a greedy and selfish culture in which too many citizens have become entrapped. We also do not attempt to distinguish between:
1. Wants and needs;
2. Necessities and luxuries;
3. Sufficiency and surplus;
Failure to do so leads to an increased danger of causing both scarcity of goods and depletion of vital resources.
The Confucian principles of living uprightly and honorably are inspiring. I also find the core teachings of the eminent Zhu Xi to be very inspiring.
His emphasis on the correlation between one's obligation to pursue personal uprightness while, at the same time, seeking the harmony of family and nation is exactly the larger moral context that seems to be missing in America right now.
We seem to have lost the ideal of the "good citizen." We seemingly lack both the will and ability to raise underlying moral questions about our economy and its operational consequences.
Our angry fingers are pointed outward, toward others. Thoughtful self-reflection upon our own words, beliefs, and actions appears nonexistent.
The engine of capitalism excels in producing an ever-greater abundance of "things" at more affordable "prices" - even though, as Mr Wan Lixin states, such "prices" often do not factor in the environmental costs inherent in producing material goods.
In the US, actual distribution of capitalism's products is not equal. Capitalism is not concerned with distinguishing between necessities and luxuries, nor whether some accumulate inordinate surplus while others lack a sufficiency of important goods (such as food, housing, and educational opportunities).
Materialism
Many of the most outspoken in America believe that "the market" must function without any interference by government, nor be influenced by moral or spiritual principles. This ensures that the language of discourse over economic issues will remain rooted in individualism and materialism, a profoundly amoral environment.
With no moral context, we get caught up in an insane rat race to earn more money so that we can consume more things. Yesterday's luxuries become today's desirables and tomorrow's necessities. Individual greed creates both scarcity and injustice.
Not only can this kind of cycle absolutely not last, but it also moves us ever further out of spiritual balance.
In America, those who produce nothing except the manipulation of goods receive excessive compensation, while the actual producers of real wealth - farmers, artisans, and laborers - are severely under-compensated.
Taxes, it is alleged, are too high, even though the gap between the 3 percent that possess a majority of the economic wealth in this country and the rest of us has widened over the past 25 years.
We do not have enough money, it is alleged, to ensure that all are entitled to basic health care, a decent job, or equal opportunities to pursue a higher education, let alone properly fund pensions and medical care for the elderly.
These complainers defend the existing tax code's bias toward the wealthy and insist that our supposedly scarce dollars must be expended toward our ever-growing military enterprises.
We must confront these questions:
How much do we need? What, truly, are the duties of government: to ensure a more adequate distribution of necessities? To support the generative efforts of real producers and place boundaries upon those who only manipulate?
Reasonable people can certainly differ about what constitutes necessity and luxury. But unless we attempt to have this discussion, those whose principal focus is on individual consumption without limit will continue to carry the day, to our - and our planet's - ruin.
(The author is a former member of the Iowa State House of Representatives. He also served in the Iowan executive branch. He retired in 2004.)
Although the author from America's heartland focuses on the ills of capitalism run amok in the US, his warnings against an unfettered free market and unlimited consumption are relevant to China and the rest of the world.
I found Mr Wan Lixin's recent articles (April 3, "Power prevails over the silent poor," and April 17, "Modern capitalism seeks ideal of soulless workers") to be, as usual, quite insightful.
Because of his and Mr Wang Yong's articles, I have begun studying China's long history. I envy China's tradition of respecting the insights of its ancient wisdom and teachings, and the connection they embody between the uprightness of each person with the larger welfare of the family and the society/state.
The United States, on the contrary, is a new country; we share less a developed code of moral thought than civic principles established in our Constitution. Our political thought is oriented around how governing power is to be shared, employed and contested.
Influenced by the Reformation and Enlightenment, our religious/moral tradition has been more likely to be focused on individual attainments and much less on a person's obligation to others in society. The driving engine of capitalism reciprocally influences our fierce code of individualism. This can create a moral and spiritual vacuum.
What passes for political discourse in the United States today is toxic: strident and angry voices exchange heated charges and accusations. There is little reasoning, almost no listening, and little examination of fundamental principles.
As someone who has devoted his adult life to public policy issues, I find this to be a very discouraging time. We seem unable to remember, let alone confront, those issues of fundamental importance for ordering a civil society.
In this very wealthy country (rich in natural resources and agricultural land) we often act toward each other as if we were poor. How can this be?
In part because our (over-) emphasis on individualism, coupled with the community-eroding effects of unleashed capitalism, has helped create a greedy and selfish culture in which too many citizens have become entrapped. We also do not attempt to distinguish between:
1. Wants and needs;
2. Necessities and luxuries;
3. Sufficiency and surplus;
Failure to do so leads to an increased danger of causing both scarcity of goods and depletion of vital resources.
The Confucian principles of living uprightly and honorably are inspiring. I also find the core teachings of the eminent Zhu Xi to be very inspiring.
His emphasis on the correlation between one's obligation to pursue personal uprightness while, at the same time, seeking the harmony of family and nation is exactly the larger moral context that seems to be missing in America right now.
We seem to have lost the ideal of the "good citizen." We seemingly lack both the will and ability to raise underlying moral questions about our economy and its operational consequences.
Our angry fingers are pointed outward, toward others. Thoughtful self-reflection upon our own words, beliefs, and actions appears nonexistent.
The engine of capitalism excels in producing an ever-greater abundance of "things" at more affordable "prices" - even though, as Mr Wan Lixin states, such "prices" often do not factor in the environmental costs inherent in producing material goods.
In the US, actual distribution of capitalism's products is not equal. Capitalism is not concerned with distinguishing between necessities and luxuries, nor whether some accumulate inordinate surplus while others lack a sufficiency of important goods (such as food, housing, and educational opportunities).
Materialism
Many of the most outspoken in America believe that "the market" must function without any interference by government, nor be influenced by moral or spiritual principles. This ensures that the language of discourse over economic issues will remain rooted in individualism and materialism, a profoundly amoral environment.
With no moral context, we get caught up in an insane rat race to earn more money so that we can consume more things. Yesterday's luxuries become today's desirables and tomorrow's necessities. Individual greed creates both scarcity and injustice.
Not only can this kind of cycle absolutely not last, but it also moves us ever further out of spiritual balance.
In America, those who produce nothing except the manipulation of goods receive excessive compensation, while the actual producers of real wealth - farmers, artisans, and laborers - are severely under-compensated.
Taxes, it is alleged, are too high, even though the gap between the 3 percent that possess a majority of the economic wealth in this country and the rest of us has widened over the past 25 years.
We do not have enough money, it is alleged, to ensure that all are entitled to basic health care, a decent job, or equal opportunities to pursue a higher education, let alone properly fund pensions and medical care for the elderly.
These complainers defend the existing tax code's bias toward the wealthy and insist that our supposedly scarce dollars must be expended toward our ever-growing military enterprises.
We must confront these questions:
How much do we need? What, truly, are the duties of government: to ensure a more adequate distribution of necessities? To support the generative efforts of real producers and place boundaries upon those who only manipulate?
Reasonable people can certainly differ about what constitutes necessity and luxury. But unless we attempt to have this discussion, those whose principal focus is on individual consumption without limit will continue to carry the day, to our - and our planet's - ruin.
(The author is a former member of the Iowa State House of Representatives. He also served in the Iowan executive branch. He retired in 2004.)
- 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.
