capitalism

Are You a Greedy Capitalist?

Brett Kunkle — Thu, 17 Jun 2010 01:19:35 -0700

I’m at the Acton Institute and I’m thinking about greed. Greed is the essence of capitalism, right? Michael Douglas captured this sentiment as corporate villain, Gordon Gekko, in the 1987 movie Wall Street.

“The point is, ladies and gentleman, that greed – for lack of a better word – is good. Greed is right. Greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms – greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge – has marked the upward surge of mankind.”

Filmmaker Michael Moore echoes this attitude in his movie Capitalism: A Love Story, calling the free market system “legalized greed.” Well, if Hollywood is correct, then a free market economy isn’t an option for the Christian. Jesus is clear on the matter: “"Watch out! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; a man's life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions." Greed is immoral. But is capitalism based on greed? No, and if you think so, you’ve bought into the myth.

Charges of greed are misplaced. Can greed flourish apart from a free market economy? Absolutely. Wherever you find human beings, no matter their economic context, you find greed. Greed is a matter of the human heart. Now, can greed arise in the free markets? Absolutely. No denying that one. But that’s saying something very different than the claim that greed is the essence of capitalism. If this were true, how could the United States, rooted in a free market economy, be the most charitable country on earth? The outpouring of charity during recent disasters like Hurrican Katrina or the Haitian earthquake fly in the face of such charges.

The basis of capitalism is not selfish greed but rather, appropriate self-interest. This distinction is vital to grasp. Self-interest is not wrong. Do you desire food and shelter? Do you wish to take care of your loved ones? I hope so. Are these greedy desires? Of course not. They represent a proper self-interest. Self-interest is simply looking out for one’s interests. Indeed, Jesus endorses self-interest. How does He tell us we ought to love others? As we love ourselves (Matthew 22:39).

Does self-interest have limits? Yes. When appropriate self-interest is abandoned and we move into selfishness, we have crossed the line into sin. But that matter must be dealt with in the individual’s heart and not pawned off on the free market system. The sinful human heart is to be blamed, not capitalism.

Of course, there’s much more to be said than can be in a short blog post. So if you want to think a little deeper than Hollywood sound-bytes, check out these Acton resources:

Capitalism and his Girlfriend Original Sin: Let’s Just Say It’s Complicated

Caroline Ferdinandsen — Thu, 29 Apr 2010 20:44:20 -0700

This is a re-post of a former essay. Let's just say I liked it when I wrote it the first time, and I still do. It forced me to articulate new thoughts, which is exactly why I love to write. So, here it goes to the top of the rotation.

If you follow ConversantLife somewhat regularly, you’ll notice a trend lately toward anti-consumerism (including some of my own posts). It seems the right thing to be—a lover of God and humanity more than a lover of things, a Christ follower who chooses abstracts like love and peace over crass commercial objects. I’ve been feeling the vibe myself. Christians, you know, can be very anti-establishment when it suits us.

All the talk of philanthropy and anti-consumerism has gotten me thinking. I’m sure lots of other people have thought about these things longer than I have. I’ll bet I could find a hundred books debating the virtues and vices of capitalism. I am not a student of economics, so pardon any embarrassing gaps in my understanding, but here’s a simple layman’s exploration.

I am struggling with the link between greed and capitalism. What would happen if all the corporate moneygrubbers converted this year and everyone became a philanthropist? Truth is, most of the things that I enjoy in my home were made by companies whose founders, at some point, were hungry for a profit. What man finds meaning and pleasure in manufacturing toilet paper or aluminum siding, for example, just for the joy of it? So, if God wants all of us to share, conserve, reduce, and give away, what would become of America? Someone else’s greed has enabled me the freedom to live humbly or to live extravagantly. Thus is the thorny way of capitalism.

Now this leads me other things that give me a headache. What if every family in America was sincerely convicted to withhold its money from the Big Box retail conglomerates and give it away to noble foreign causes? No doubt, the Targets and Best Buys and Wal-Marts would collapse, leaving many manufacturers to fire their employees. Ah, but there’s the catch, for if man’s heart were pure around the world, then noble capitalists wouldn’t need to pay out to war torn countries in the first place. Nor would I give away my old clothes to the homeless, for under God’s principles, the complex conditions leading to homelessness wouldn’t exist.

And what if all the abortion clinics suddenly adopted God’s view of the sanctity of life? If we would reverse every abortion in American this year, imagine the economic impact all those children (many of them in situations of poverty and dysfunction) would have on our culture? But there we go again, for if we were really doing things God’s way, then many of those desperate children wouldn’t have been desperate in the first place (nor even conceived in an unhallowed place, for that matter) . . . and so goes our endless rewind. Every charitable act is predicated on the sin that required it. If that doesn’t blow your mind, read that sentence again.

And now, my head throbbing tonight, I realize that sin seems to be part of the American Dream, and I’m having trouble with that. I’m a product of this centuries-old year national experiment, finding value and comfort in a world with good roads and clean water and entertainment and a sturdy paycheck and light bulbs that go on and off on command. Profit and innovation and greed and curiosity and convenience and narcissism and sin get so mixed up together that I can’t figure out how to get to the beginning of the string. So when I say a sweet prayer with my kids at night that goes something like “Thank you, God, for blessing us with a warm house and food to eat,” it’s starting to feel positively weird. Should I not pray instead, “Thank you, God, that American self-absorption and corporate greed paved the way to our comfort”?

The more I unravel this ball of yarn, the more confused I become. The what-ifs are keeping me awake, and I keep going back and back and back to the beginning of the problem, trying to figure out God’s purposes. And you know where I end up?

The Garden of Eden.

That’s the only place where all the bohemian dreams and political hopes can hope to thrive, and I’m afraid we already missed that train. I understand a little better why hippies wanted to shut out all the capitalist noise, and why human beings dream up utopian societies. We’re all trying to get back to the Garden of Eden, if you ask me.

Perhaps capitalism is the best we’ve got in a fallen world. You may complain that nothing on the ideological menu looks very good to you, including democracy and its free enterprise system, but the alternatives--such as dictatatorship, poverty, injustice, and civil war--will give you food poisoning. The same system that allows us to squash the little guy and over-consume also allows us to love our fellow man. Sin might be part of the human equation, but with Jesus’ help, I’m doing my darndest to make it not so.

It’s complicated and I’m sure somebody’s got a book title they can recommend. But I’m an essayist, and it’s my job to get in and get out for the sake of time and space. In a phrase, original sin always gets us into trouble and God’s grace always gets us out. Tonight, that’s good enough for me.

Through the Prism of ---Isms

bo.white — Fri, 16 Apr 2010 15:10:00 -0700

Today, marks the first day of an indefinite series on the -isms shaping the week's current events and global discourse. Why do this? Well, two main reasons motivate me to make each Friday post a different -ism......First, I actually heard someone say the other day, 'I am glad communism fell and I love capitalism, but there's so much cynicism and pessimism and not enough optimism, don't you think?' I was exhausted and energized listening to the onslaught of -isms thrown out. Exhausted because I wondered if the speaker truly knew how nuanced some of the words are and energized because I thought to myself, 'hey, I bet there's a lot of -isms, worth talking about.' And so, I am talking about them, but not in a worldview catalog sort of way, but in a week in review manner. The theme of this blog is to ponder ideas that impact us both locally and globally understanding that ideas have consequences, so each Friday, I will focus in on an --ism that has been particularly raised in the global discourse for the week. And since it's been an odd week, my first --ism post will have two words featured, one of them spelled differently than conventional --isms.

Capitalism should be mentioned this week not only because of recent discussions surrounding whether or not Capitalism can survive or if faith and capitalism mix (see also a recent Duke University Press release by William Connolly entitled, "Capitalism and Christianity, American Style" ), but because Goldman Sachs was charged with fraud by the SEC and once again we're left wondering who is telling the truth and if capitalism can survive its own success. The markets reacted by going down and the blood pressure of many reacted by going up. Is this relegated to a chosen few or has capitalism run its course? Furthermore, those of us who are convinced of the truth of the Bible need to assess if we fear the decline of capitalism more than God. We should not confuse the current version of capitalism with Scriptural teaching letting the former inform the latter. We always critique capitalism in light of Scripture and if there's a discrepancy, well, then capitalism, not the Bible, must go. There may be challenges ahead, though, as the predominant prosperity gospel takes a beating in the public square.

Cataclysm is the next --ism of the week, although the spelling will challenge the anal retentive among us. As a synonym for disaster, the China earthquake and the Iceland volcano remind us not only of the power of nature and the enormity of creation, but we should also be reminded of the need for humility. When Jesus calmed the winds and the waves, the Gospel writers tell us that the ability to calm the storm frightened the disciples more than the storm itself. Jesus is actually more powerful than volcanoes and earthquakes, but we treat him lightly and take disasters far more seriously. In the aftermath of the Haiti earthquake, millions of dollars were raised very quickly, but missionaries continue to struggle to make ends meet. Of course, this is not an either-or discussion, rather cataclysms often reveal other cataclysm. Hurrican Katrina revealed a broken government and a neglected group of people living in poverty. What will the Iceland volcano (already wreaking havoc on the airline industry) and the China earthquake reveal? It's not what goes into a man, but what comes out that makes him unclean. What is coming out of our hearts when we see capitalism run amuck and cataclysms multiply...maybe that's worth paying attention to in our quiet time tomorrow morning.

-bo

The Wordview Behind Avatar

Sean McDowell — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 19:25:28 -0800

The year is 2154, and humans are attempting to mine the valuable mineral unabtanium from the planet Pandora. Humans have virtually destroyed their own planet and desperately need extra-planetary resources to survive. Jake Sully, a wounded marine, is assigned to infiltrate the seemingly hostile indigenous aliens (the Na’vi) to win their trust and talk them into relocating their colony, which happens to be situated right atop a massive amount of unabtanium.

If he can successfully infiltrate the Na’vi people and negotiate their relocation, then the humans will not have to force them to move through military intervention (those of you who are observant already notice the political insinuations about the U.S. allegedly only going to war in Iraq for oil).

To infiltrate the Na’vi, Jake transposes his consciousness into an Avatar body under the supervision of Grace Augustine (Sigourney Weaver). Once inside Pandora, Jake meets Neytiri, a female alien who saves his life and introduces him to the rest of the Na’vi, who eventually accept him as one of their own. Neytiri plays the role of the mentor (ala Obi-One Kanobi, Mr. Miyagi, and Gandolf) who shows him all the ways of the Na’vi.

Through his experience with the Na’vi, Jake’s loyalty begins to change. He becomes a true Na’vi, which raises the question: which side will Jake choose? Avatar really tells the same story as movies such as The Last Samurai, Brother Bear, and Dances with Wolves—where a foreigner has preconceptions about an “alien” culture, yet upon spending time with them and learning their ways, realizes that his new “home” is truly the more benevolent, and that his original ways were really inhumane.

From the perspective of a 3-D film experience, Avatar is truly remarkable. I completely forgot that I was wearing glasses for most of the film! This is a huge step beyond the 3-D glasses with red and blue lenses (anyone remember Jaws 3?). The scenery on Pandora is nothing short of breathtaking. There are floating mountains, beautiful water falls, fascinating creatures, and luminescent plants that react to touch (Heaven?). Even though I think the film has potential to cause considerable spiritual confusion, I can’t help but give Cameron credit for his storytelling and creativity. Now, on to the worldview analysis…

ANTI-CAPITALISM

Parker Selfridge (Giovanni Ribisi) plays a slimy, sleazy, flippant corporate “pig” only interested in the monetary bottom-line. His character is reminiscent of Paul Reiser from Aliens. He has no concern for the life on Pandora and is gladly willing to destroy them to obtain unabtanium unless a diplomatic solution can be reached. At one point Parker says to Grace, “What do they want? We’ve tried money and education, but nothing works.” The inference is clear: these nature-loving creatures don’t want anything that Western corporate capitalist culture has to offer. In fact, it’s the capitalists who need to learn a lesson from the Na’vi.

It might be possible to chalk this character up as a criticism of corporate greed rather than a criticism of capitalism per se. However, I’m just not convinced because this portrayal seems to go along too consistently with the anti-capitalist fervor that has been resonating in our culture recently. It’s certainly ironic that Avatar has a central character negatively portraying (and stereotyping) capitalists when it’s already grossed over 1 billion dollars! But this is a minor theme in the movie.

PANTHEISTIC SPIRITUALITY

It would be virtually impossible to miss the not-so-subtle pantheism that pervades the entire film. The Na’vi are spiritually connected to their entire world, including the plants and animals. Their home is a humongous tree, which is clearly representative of the idea of Mother Earth. The Na’vi are so connected to nature that they say of prayer of gratitude, and sometimes even cry, when they kill an animal for food. The audience is given a virtual lesson in pantheism while Neytiri mentors Jake into their way of life. A pantheistic explanation is given for EVERY aspect of life including what they eat, how they pray, how they worship the planet, and how they relate to each other. Avatar is filled with rituals that are overseen by a Shaman (there is a scene of tree worship that is so realistic my wife almost walked out. In her words, it was demonic).

The pantheistic worldview doesn’t simply play a background role to make the film plausible, like the Force does in Star Wars. Rather, pantheistic spirituality is literally preached to the audience through the characters and their interactions.

But there is a subtle difference that sets it apart from other pantheistic movies (such as Lion King, Pocahontas, or Star Wars).

SCIENTIFIC NATURALISM

While Avatar clearly portrays pantheistic spirituality in a positive light, I think it may be subtly subverting it with a naturalistic worldview. The naturalist in the film is clearly Grace Augustine (whose name is taken from St. Augustine who wrote, “The City of God”). She is the scientist who is constantly looking for a natural explanation for their spiritual behavior. While the Na’vi talk in spiritual terms (they describe “seeing” as looking into a person’s depth), there does seem to be a physical explanation lurking beneath all their behavior. Below the ground are cords that connect all the trees on the planet, like a giant network of computers. To “connect” with the animals, the Na’vi have to physically connect their hair to the animals’ manes. And to hear from their ancestors, they have to physically connect to the trees, not unlike connecting to the Internet. This is significantly different from the Star Wars films, for example, in which Luke, Yoda, and Darth Vader are capable of manipulating reality from a distance.

So, what is the moral of the story? Here’s my take: People ought to forsake greedy Western capitalism and embrace pantheistic spirituality, even though such practices have a perfectly natural explanation.

There is much more that could be discussed about in this film (e.g., environmentalism, or the way it portrays the military). I had great discussions in my classes this past week and have had many discussions with other young people as well. Even though this movie will likely cause considerable spiritual confusion, it provides a great opportunity for parents and youth workers to engage young people in worldview conversations.

Avatar is also an example of how one worldview (scientific naturalism) can be used to subvert another. I think this is exactly what Paul does in Acts 17 (See my book APOLOGETICS FOR A NEW GENERATION—the chapter by Brian Godawa). Christians ought to take a lesson from Cameron and do the same thing.

The Economy of God

Mark Russell — Mon, 18 May 2009 06:16:05 -0700

The Economy of God

Mark Russell — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 15:58:10 -0700

My wife, Laurie, and I lived in Munich, Germany for several years. When we got there we discovered that Germans, by and large, do not have built-in closets. In place of closets they use schranks, large pieces of furniture that function like a closet, something like an armoire, only a lot bigger.

They are huge pieces of furniture and for novices, as we were, they are quite complex to assemble. After spending hours putting ours together we realized we had made several mistakes. Thankfully, however, the schrank was functional. Breaking it down and putting it back together again was just out of the question. It would be just too much work. But over time the imperfections of our assembly job became annoying. It didn’t look right and the doors were awkward.

A year later, for a wide variety of reasons, we had to move. Moving is always a lot of work and presents many challenges. But we were excited for one reason: we had a strategic opportunity to re-build the schrank the way it should have been in the first place.

Right now, our world is facing a global economic crisis. This is a strategic opportunity to re-build the economy the way it should have been in the first place.

To re-build the economy in the right way, we need to think through four important questions:

I. What is the significance of work?

What did God do in the beginning? He created the world and that was work. This is stated explicitly in Genesis 2:3. The word used for work here for God is the same word used for humans elsewhere in the Old Testament.

After doing the work of creation, God creates humans in his image in Genesis 1:26-27. Theologians have debated the meaning of being created in God’s image. But it essentially comes down to the fact that an image is a reflection or a mirror. Put another way, we can imitate God.

After creating humans in his image, God then commissions humans to work (Gen 1:28). So the Bible starts with God working, creating humans to imitate him then directly commissioning them to work.

When Christians talk about work they tend to do so in what I call as reflecting “instrumental” value. That is work serves as an instrument to good things such as providing for one’s family, giving to the church, etc…But work has “fundamental” value because it is a part of our original created design and a part of our “fundamental” purpose on earth.

Work is something we do in partnership with God. Genesis 2:19 shows Adam working with God. God brings him animals. Adam names them. God did not stop working. He simply stopped working by himself. Now, He chooses to work with us.

Consider that God created humans by himself but then commissioned humans to create other humans (Gen. 1:28). Any spiritually minded parent knows that God created their children. But parents also know that their children would not exist if were not for them. Work is the same. Just like we partner with God to create humans, we partner with God to sustain and promote His creation.

II. What is the purpose of business?

Milton Friedman said the purpose of business is to maximize financial profits for shareholders. Ever since, business schools and the business media have pretty much followed this logic.

Money is important. I’m suspicious of people who “do not care” about money. We need money to survive and it also enables us to enjoy some of the good things. But making money is not the sole purpose of business.

Money is like air. We need it to survive. But if you are living to breathe, you do not understand the purpose of life? If you are working for money then you do not understand the purpose of working.

Rather than saying that the purpose of business is to maximize profits for shareholders, perhaps we should say its purpose is to maximize value for society.

III. How is American culture a unique contributor to this crisis?

People who work in the field of intercultural studies typically use14 cultural lenses to analyze a culture. One of those lenses is to determine a culture’s time orientation as either short-term or long-term. What do you think America is? Consider the following:

Savings. From 2002-2007 American homeowners took out $1.7 trillion more in home loans than they spent on their homes or home improvements. This was above and beyond our earned income. According to Economist magazine per capita average savings during this time period was 0%.

Treatment of the Environment. Humans created on sixth day in Gen. 1:26-27. However, in Gen. 1:22 we read the first blessing in the Bible from God is to non-human creation, plants, fish and birds…It is a blessing for God and for their multiplication and increase.

We are facing an environmental sub-prime crisis, because we have not considered the welfare of non-human creation in many of our decisions. Recently, I was at a business conference and heard an executive for a well-known chocolate company. There was nothing about his presentation that suggested he was particularly socially or environmentaly conscious. However, he noted that they were having tremendous challenges getting cocoa for their chocolate. He said they’d had the problem before but could always get it from other countries in Africa. Now, he said now they are having problems locating a new country to get the chocolate we need.

IV. Who are the poor?

The final question we need to ask ourselves as we build up a new economic system is who is poor? If you have a family of four and have an annual household income of $36,000 you probably think of yourself as poor but you are in the wealthiest 1% of people in the world.

Wealth produces the desire for more wealth. This is why Americans burned through our earned income and $1.7 trillion in home equity without saving a dime. There is no end to the desire for wealth. Recently, I asked an entrepreneur whose net worth is in the nine figures, if he thought greed or pride was a greater problem. He said greed has no end and that he knows people who are unhappy with their private gulfstream jet because they have friends whose jets are slightly better.

The fact is we don’t remember the truly poor in good times or bad. In the 90’s as our economy expanded exponentially, the poorest 25% of Africa got 20% poorer.

I once visited a microfinance loan group in Manila. These people were poor. We were in a one-room house. It was raining and water was pouring down the wall and flowing across the floor. At the end of the meeting, they took up an offering for “the poor in their community.” The total was $2.80. They made a vat of porridge, took it to the center of the slum and within minutes children were emerging to eat. Several were obviously malnourished.

We are in a global economic crisis because of this: The rich see the very rich and want to live like them. The poor see the very poor and want to help them.

Moving forward, we need to all ask ourselves, 1) what is the significance of work? 2) what is the purpose of business?, 3) how can we be more long-term oriented?, and 4) how can we remember the poor?