Capitalism
March 12th, 2007 by Stephen
A link to one of my articles on the Agricultural Biodiversity Weblog elicited a comment that included this:
The so-called ‘market economy’ (a euphemism for monopoly capitalism) is not environmentally sustainable, no matter how much green paint and promises of ‘eliminating poverty’, etc., you apply.
As a very ambivolent anti-capitalist, I found strong sympathy with that statement, and yet I find that I cannot agree. These are my reasons:
Capitalism is driven by greed and consumerism. It is an illogical and wasteful system, and one that has huge problems. However, whilst the greed leads to an anti-environmental cycle if left unchecked, it is nevertheless possible to intervene to use the assumptions of capitalism for environmental benefit. An example of this might be the EU emissions trading scheme, which puts a price on emission reduction, and thus generates a trade. Whilst the scheme is not perfect, it is better than hand wringing or sticking our heads in the ground and saying there is no problem (or the problem is intractable).
Capitalism is an organic system like any other. It may be a system driven to consume resources, but like any system, if the consumption is too aggressive, then there are negative feedbacks into the system that restrain it. (The problem being that the negative feedbacks perhaps kick in too late to be of any use to the people that are suffering now!)
Historically capitalism has been evil, and yet has paradoxically also been a great benefit. The UK invented capitalism with our industrial revolution. It could be argued that Wedgewood invented the idea of planned obsolesence, and modern marketing. In generating a market in patterned chinaware, he essentially began the whole process, even as indutrialisation was changing our landscape.
But here is the oddity - industrialisation created the terrible “labour market†whereby even skilled labourers would be stuck on subsistence wages, and any response to change in the labour market would take a generation to work through - which did not help those with skills no longer valued. But at the same time, the industrialised UK saw population growth - especially in industrialised towns, whilst non industrial countries saw famine and starvation that killed millions.
So unless we have a solution that is better for people than capitalism, we have to paraphrase Churchill et al. and say “Capitalism is the worst of all systems. Except for all the othersâ€.
- Finally, I am a pragmatist. The way to change the world is in small steps and individual changes.
I think the way to change the world is to obey Christ, and then wait for the rapture and for Him to make the world new. I think it is pretty plain scripturally speaking, that the world is NOT going to get better! It will become more and more depraved until He returns. His longsuffering is why He tarries, so that more might be saved. But I am quite eager to see the New Jerusalem and New Earth and New Heaven.
if you are a pragmatist, What does that make me??
Mrs. Meg Logan
You are right that obedience to Christ is the way to change the world. But the question is: what does Jesus command on this issue? I think He would detest the assumptions of greed at the core of capitalism - but he would also oppose any violent overthrow of such a system. Thus the small steps I take are just the ones I think Christ commands.
I don’t share the assumptions of premillennialism that suppose the world is going to get steadily worse. It is clear that the evil of unregenerate human nature will be with us until the end of time, but it is also clear that as we as Christians are obedient to Christ, we can change the world for the better.
200 years ago the UK abolished the slave trade in all its colonies as a response to the Christian conscience renewed in the Great Awakening. This was an example of Christians, being committed to Christ, changing the world for the better. And this can and will happen as long as Christians continue to walk in obedience to Christ.
The Atheist fundamentalist Richard Dawkins said that (particularly in America) there was a kind of Christianity that wants to bring about misery and nuclear war because it will hasten the return of Christ.
But Dawkins does not understand Christianity and Christian theology. And any Christian who agrees with Dawkins does not understand the power of God. Christians are commanded to love their neighbours, and to be stewards (not pillagers) of this earth. When we follow Christ’s commands we change the world for the better.