I went to Hillsdale College, home of the Von Mises library. In fact, "Hillsdale College is the place Ludwig von Mises chose in his will to be the recipient of his personal library. This important collection of materials related to business and economics is housed in the Ludwig von Mises Room in the Mossey Library and is available to Hillsdale faculty and students." I worked on illustrations for the first nationally distributed, student run, libertarian newspaper- The Restoration. I came from a family of entrepreneurs and was totally gung-ho laissez-faire free-market economics. Then I moved to Gaitherburg, Maryland.
In May of 2000, just weeks after graduating from the Beacon of Liberty, I packed all of my earthly belongings into a small mini-mini-van and headed south. I was young and idealistic and following my dreams. I lived in the suburban blight on the outermost ring of Washington sprawl (in just five years the sprawl has spread to West Virginia and Pennsylvania state lines.) I began to wonder how this wonderful "free-market" could produce such ghastly communities- if you could even call them that- not to mention strip malls and shopping centers. How could the market so disregard beauty and simple pleasures. Why are people willing to spend 2-3 hours a day in a car on the beltway? So, they can afford a McMansion in West Virginia where they only have the time and energy to sleep? Things just weren't adding up for me.
After ony one year I moved to the charming town of Frederick. Unfortunately our beautiful little city is being overrun with sprawl and overflow from Washington- mostly folks who either cannot afford to live there or those who want the slower pace of a smaller town. I think that many of them are feeling disappointed with the escalating housing prices and the gridlock they face every morning on I270.
In the early days of my blog I was befuddled over modern life and started to question capitalism, only to be ferociously attacked by some of my Hillsdale comrades. My observations in 2003:
I see why they hate Capitalism: This weekend I had the opportunity... err misfortune... of going Christmas shopping at Arundel Mills. For those of you unfamiliar with this popular Maryland shoppers destination, it is a mall. Not just a mall, but a mall bigger and brighter and tackier than anything I have ever seen before. Cathedral height ceilings painted bright, obnoxious colors soured above us. Giant big-screen televisions suspended from the ceiling offered the visually overwhelmed shopper some more visual stimulation. Then the movie theatre: Muvico Egyptian 24. 24 big screens dwelling within a reconstructed Egyptian temple. A temple indeed. A temple, where we house our most sacred.
What I realized, though, is that this hateful thing is the result of capitalism. So we ought to hate capitalism, right? More to learn from the Middle Ages: The corruption in the Vatican and the Crusades didn't mean that Christianity was at its core bad and ought to be ousted. These negative things were not the fault of Christianity itself, but by people in power who used God's name for political gain. This hideous, money trap of a shopping center is not capitalism, but its abuse, its excess.
So, I joined a food co-op, "Food for People, not for Profit." Many of the items they sell are higher-priced than those at Giant for Safeway, but the quality is unsurpassed and the ecological footprint a little smaller. I have a vast list of boycotts- offending super stores and fast-food chains. We'd have to get a lot more folks to shop at my teeny co-op to impact the world. What else can we do?
When I go to the movie theatre I literally have to hide my face during the previews- as the many years tof media deprivation have left my senses not-yet-desensitizing to the ever-increasing "jolt factor" of intense images and quickly changing scenes. I have to thank my parents for this- we had minimal television exposure growing up. There just seemed like so many other things to do.
Then just the other day, I picked up a copy of Paul Stiles' "Is the American Dream Killing You?" I read it in three days. There are others out there! Only this person can better articulate the forces at work and offer a small bit on what we can do about it. I highly recommend this book to anyone who is concerned with how ugly our country has become, how our children are becoming anorexic at 9 years old, at strip malls and suburban sprawl, antibiotics in our thanksgiving meals, increased use of anti-depressants, burn out and road rage, etc., etc., etc., ad nauseum.
Until we infuse our capitalism with some morality, I am removing the VOTE LIBERTARIAN sticker off of my pickup truck.
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
20 comments:
Oh, libertarianism is definitely of the debbil. And I say that as a lover of markets.
My comment was going to be that Gideon Strauss would surely smile to read that last line — and there's his smile already submitted. :)
HA HA HA!
You might be amused to hear by the way that the little church family I grew up among during high school years & early 20s, & among whom my parents remain in leadership, have been renting a theater in that very Arundel Mills Muvico to house their Sunday morning worship for a couple of years. I can't at all countenance the idea of choosing that setting for the ministry of word & sacrament for my own part, as long as there should be any decent alternative. But there is a kind of odd 'redemptive' irony about the thought of their invading that space in order to worship Christ. The people of that church are very sincere in their hope of honoring the Lord in their ministry together.
I have been to those "movie theatre churches" as well. I think part of it is the attempt to be "hip" and "relevant," but I think it is sad that we have to market our faith like we hock a new CD.
Like I always say, "If redemption, forgiveness of sins, eternal communion with the Creator of the Universe isn't enough to draw the crowds then some cheesey Christian music sure won't do the trick."
I was always under the impression they didn't have the money to build yet, so had to rent a cheap space...
----
'm just gonna free associate here...
I've always felt markets weren't very good at self-discipline and restraint. For all the anthropomorphizing we ascribe to them, there is no conscious act or thought.
Capitalism / free-market stuff is generally likened to forces of nature. Yeah, like hurricanes and tsunamis are forces of nature.
We euphamistically describe the desolation left in the wake of those "forces" as things like customers flow to the best product.
Hmmm, I guess the gutted remains of sprawl communities are what's left when people flow away to better communities?
Probably why democrats want regulation, because self-regluation doesn't seem to exist naturally or sustainably.
I can appreciate that.
Too bad federal government is inconsistently effective with regulatory power.
And that seems to bring us back to the lowest-level of government...and to communities...
Well, in a way the reality is the reverse isn't it? Cheesy music does draw the crowds, when it's properly in place with some array of weekly provisions for hearing exhortation to personal improvement, and with a well-structured brandable package of social amenity 'ministries' for family & individual. Takes a lot of resources to really do it right — and most churches that look toward this ideal, perhaps, make the model look bad by the poverty of their efforts to achieve it — but when it's done well, you've got to admit it 'does the trick'. These are churches you're most likely to read about in Christian magazines or even in the news mags & the papers, often enough because of some admirable work they're accomplishing, returned out of their success back to their suburban & urban social contexts.
All that's beside the point though, if we as sinners are not being confronted by, and if we as believers are not being restored and brought to new life by, our resurrected Jesus making himself present among us his people in the ministry of his own word and sacraments.
(Leaving your post topic far behind now, but it's partly your fault! :) )
Heh, the lack of morality in libertarian (and more so in the horrid, randroid objectivist crap) is definitely a problem. Frankly, the public policy problems are less bothersome to me than the personal toll it takes...i.e. it is pretty difficult to be even remotely a good christian and seriously, over the long term, believe in objectivist thought.
Capitalism itself is not immoral, but it offers the freedom for individuals to act immorally. The Prozac junkies with anorexic kids don't care about the ugliness of the strip malls in their neighborhoods, especially if they only have to drive their huge SUVs a quarter of a mile to buy their iPods and HDTVs. But honestly, that's the beauty of the system, because it equally offers us the freedom to behave morally.
Capitalism isn't moral or immoral it is amoral.
There's a new study saying that a majority (56%) of Americans think Wal-Mart is bad for the country... And yet, everyone keeps shopping at Wal-Mart.
Most of us claim we want beauty, quality and a thriving local economy. But when it comes down to it, we'd rather save a buck and an extra trip. (Personally, I go to Wal-Mart for the $1 Popeye and Superman DVDs.)
We don't want Wal-Mart in our small towns, but can't resist it once it's there. So, maybe the paradox of capitalism is that to get what we *really* want, sometimes our choices need to be limited.
Another Hillsdale apostate...
Ha ha ha. This is funny.
What are the livable alternatives to prosperity?
Madness?
So the market doesn't actually give us what we really want, which are quaint communities with locally owned shops.
Well, I for one will not step foot in a Wal-Mart. We have TWO in Frederick, by the way.
Hillsdale Apostate join forces.
I'll make it a two-person boycott. :-)
I ask the same question I ask of all of my political junky Christian friends who are angered and surprised when teachers can't teach creationism in schools, or when people want to pass laws making gay marriage legal: what do you expect when you give freedom to people who are inherently sinful? Democracy, capitalism, anything based on personal liberty may be superior to a single ruling tyrant, or to communism, especially when it allows Christians the free exercise of religion. But no amount of political or financial freedom will liberate non-Christians from their sinful selves. Christ offers the only true way to liberty; every other route leads to a solipsistic cycle of selfish desire, indulgence, and bitter disappointment.
You expected or hoped the ultimate fruits of capitalism would be beauty and community? Capitalism is popular because it works. It works because it is based on reality, and the reality it is based on is that people do everything out of their own perceived self-interest. It acknowledges the Christian truth of the in-born selfishness of all mankind. If the results are starting to seem ugly, it is because the real end of human desires is showing. Capitalism may propel the economy, and certainly some good comes out of it (reducing poverty, improving health) but we should not expect the ultimate results of anything that thrives on the selfishness of entire countries to be fulfilling and good. Capitalism (and democracy), in my mind, is superior to other systems only because it feeds (and feeds on) the self-interest of many people rather than few. It is less susceptible to the uncontrollable whims of single individuals or small groups.
Churchill said, “Many forms of government have been tried and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others that have been tried from time to time.” The same could probably be said of capitalism. Don’t expect it to redeem anything. Nothing that depends on human will and desire can do that.
If you expect people to desire what is right and good, don’t just show them beauty and assume they will recognize that it is Good, and want it, and know how to pursue it. We are cursed to grasp for what is good with filthy hands, dirtying it in the process, or to chase after the shadowy reflection of what is good and beautiful, all the while running in the opposite direction of where we need to go. Keep showing them the Creator of true beauty through your art, and in knowing Him, their eyes will be opened to the true way to what is Good.
seems like this thread has come around again a couple of times--
I am sensing agreement that there is no intrinsic virtue to expect from capitalistic forces. they simply are what they are.
taken to extremes, we can see extreme prosperity and extreme decay.
what I've heard from sarah is we can choose how we participate in the economy and reject the notion of fatalistic submission.
back to sarah's question - how then to nurture and grow these bohemias of responsible, uplifting, life enriching (vs. detraction), aka "moral" capitalism?
i think that would be an interesting thread to start.
peace out. ;?)
Here, here to everything the Walton said.
Honestly, Sarah, I'm beginning to think that you believe that there is a basic human right to beauty. Don't you think it is up to the individual to seek out or make beauty in her own life and not expect that captialism, democracy or society to provide it for them?
Personally, I wouldn't want my government doling out or regulating beauty anymore than I want involved regulating any other part of my life. I know you hate this, but I support the average American's right to surround themselves with the prepackaged, tacky and tastless. Let's face it, freedom even in it's tackiest form still beats tyranny any day. In a community beauty contest, the McMansions of the American suburbs are still bombshells compared to anything Communism ever came up with.
There's nothing wrong with the American Dream. That's not what's killing us. What's killing us is any attempt to navigate life without morals, virtue, religion - in short, without God. You can change the economic or governmental structure; regulate beauty, work hours, the media, food, etc; but such things will only change the symptoms of the problem, not fix it. Beauty, small business and organic food will NOT save us from ourselves. Only Christ can do that.
Great exchange! :?)
Ah, but there must be some social contract - some responsibility to upkeep of the commons or we will enjoy our freedoms from the middle of a superfund site.
Responsibility is the converse of freedom.
As Grace rightly says, 'there is no right to beauty.' May I add to the end of that statement,
"There is no right to beauty...but that which we cultivate through our own labors"?
But doesn't it also follow that, there is no right to freedom but that which we cultivate?
Watering the tree of freedom isn't just about sacrificing young soldiers. It's about continual sacrifice- and that sacrifice has to be working on creating a more perfect Union - not just a more perfect Me.
(both the spiritual and earthly Union)
If we merely say "hands off" to freedom in the way laissez-faire says "hands off" to markets, we'll get the whole range from very responsible to very irresponsible.
The problem is the very irresponsibles don't poison only their own world.
And the absence of a responsible reflex in business - occasions the risk to do harm on a scale no individual could ever accomplish.
External regulation is only ever partially effective, but what else is there in the absence of an empowered personal responsibility to promote responsible freedom or capitalism?
After all these words (which I have enjoyed), I find a very simple truth in just a few words:
Go re-read The Lorax. :?)
This is in response to some earlier posts, upon which I have been musing since Amy posted her response on her blog. You can read my lengthier response there.
However, there are a couple of other items that won't leave me alone. The first is this: MONEY is amoral; what we do with it, what our attitude toward it is, and what economic systems are in place are profoundly moral questions. That's why Paul wrote that "the LOVE of money [not just "money"] is the root of all kinds of evil." Also why Christ devoted more time to talking about money than any other single subject.
The second is the Wal-Mart question. Because we are in a free society, we can shop wherever we like, and, as Grace has noted, we are free to be as tacky as we like as well. One often overlooked notion is that the presence of Wal-Mart in a community allows people to buy necessities (toothpaste, detergent, soap, and the like) at a significantly lower cost than can be offered by a smaller enterprise. This in turn frees up cash to be spent by the average person (who, prior to the advent of discount stores, often did not have discretionary funds - all or nearly all was devoted to necessities) on "beautiful" things, and, in fact, has been shown over the long term to result in downtowns with more interesting shops carrying non-necessary items that may enrich people's lives (decorator items, antiques and collectibles, books, crafts, etc.).
But beyond all that, Wal-Mart was first on the ground after Katrina, using its distribution network and surviving stores to get water, generators and food to the victims 'way ahead of the Red Cross, FEMA, and others. That strikes me as a moral act, one which ought to be considered alongside the usual questions of tackiness and urban sprawl.
Just some thoughts. Great discussion!
Walton wrote: “If the results are starting to seem ugly, it is because the real end of human desires is showing.” The sentiment expressed seems to be as follows: Yes, we all grumble about capitalism, but really our discontent rests with some sort of corrupt human nature; a corruption which can be supported by certain theological tenets. So is it really the case that discontent with our current economic practices boils down to invariable human nature, about which nothing can be done? Is capitalism really just a reflection of peoples’ greedy desires? Is the desire to buy all sorts of material goods immune to criticism because we just chalk it up to a greedy nature?
No, it’s not. Capitalism is much more invidious than simply a principle proclaiming economic freedom – it’s much more than just letting people spend how they want. Marketing, an essential practice at the core of the capitalist enterprise, is about the CREATION of desire. Sarah may be able to hide her face from the adverts at the movie theaters, but very few in the industrialized West manage to get through a day (much less their lives) without constant pressure from advertisements of all sorts. It’s not that we just happen to want stuff: we’re MADE to want stuff. Moreover, that influence over the consumer’s will is an essential part of what drives capitalism.
Is it a coincidence that teenagers everywhere all need iPod’s all at the same time? Certainly it is not: it is a combination of novel technologies, advertising, and popularization, all for the sake of turning a profit.
I object to capitalism’s overwhelming pressure to engage society primarily as a consumer. Consumer mentality easily makes its way out of the shopping malls and into the rest of our lives, and this is something that everybody (but perhaps especially Christians) needs to be wary of. The “creeping normalcy” of consumerism is sometimes difficult to detect, but it is nonetheless shocking in the extent to which it structures our lives. Many references (on this blog and elsewhere) have been made to the mall-like atmosphere of mega-churches. Not even our temples of worship can escape the pervasive reach of this economic standpoint. When consumerism infiltrates our rational choices, our relationships, our religion, and our desires, then it has achieved an institutional prevalence that will prove extremely difficult to abjure.
The market is not about learning or about obtaining a better standard of living. It is about satisfaction. More precisely, it is about future satisfaction. It must create a sense of desire first, and then entice with the prospect of fulfillment. But the promise of fulfillment remains always in the future. Once one remembers that her desires have been satisfied, then the jig is up. But the market succeeds when an individual’s yearning can be kept at a consistent pitch. So the market is largely about forgetting. As thinking people and as Christians, these are surely negative consequences.
Walton’s attitude seems to be one of frustration, but this sort of frustration all too easily gives birth to cynicism and skepticism. The cynicism announces that sinful people inevitably act (and buy) in the ways they do now; the skepticism insists that there is no way to improve upon our current practices. (This is reminiscent of the skepticism voiced when people say that nothing can be done about corrupt politicians. Hannah Arendt warned that “corruption begets corruption” – that the public eventually becomes inured to flagrant abuses of political power, and as a result, they come to tolerate it because they think nothing can be done. Similarly, I suggest, we have become accustomed to the excesses of capitalism, and too easily write it off as the best of a bad lot of economic systems.) I think there are ways to change – in fact, there are lots of ways to change for the better. Just because particular economic labels have failed in the past doesn’t mean that there’s nothing left to try.
This conversation is not primarily about human freedom or sinfulness or our attempt to live without God – all weighty questions, to be sure, but tangential to Sarah’s original posting. It’s a conversation about how to best structure our economic practices. I’ve tried to give some reasons why our current practices are detriments to our welfare as human beings and as children of God. Perhaps I’m hopelessly optimistic, but I’m convinced we can do better.
So keep those eyes closed when the ads appear, Sarah, and stay vigilant against those forces that would transform you into a mere consumer. We can all learn from your experiences.
Merry Christmas to all.
Post a Comment