EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- 'Beyond Orwellian': Outrage Follows Revelations of Vast Domestic Spying Program
- The Bill of Rights Exists: An Open Letter to Dianne Feinstein
- The World Economy Is a Ticking Time Bomb (and The Fuse is Burning)
- Major Loss to Organic Farmers as Court Rules in Favor of Monsanto
- Naomi Klein: 'Anti-Shock Doctrines' Show the Way to Resist
Popular content
Today's Top News
A Revolution in Spirit
As America, recession mired, enters the hope-inspired age of Barack Obama, a silent but fateful struggle for the soul of capitalism is being waged. Can the market system finally be made to serve us? Or will we continue to serve it? George W. Bush argued that the crisis is "not a failure of the free-market system, and the answer is not to try to reinvent that system." But while it is going too far to declare that capitalism is dead, George Soros is right when he says that "there is something fundamentally wrong" with the market theory that stands behind the global economy, a "defect" that is "inherent in the system."
The issue is not the death of capitalism but what kind of capitalism--standing in which relationship to culture, to democracy and to life? President Obama's Rubinite economic team seems designed to reassure rather than innovate, its members set to fix what they broke. But even if they succeed, will they do more than merely restore capitalism to the status quo ante, resurrecting all the defects that led to the current debacle?
Being economists, even the progressive critics missing from the Obama economic team continue to think inside the economic box. Yes, bankers and politicians agree that there must be more regulatory oversight, a greater government equity stake in bailouts and some considerable warming of the frozen credit pump. A very large stimulus package with a welcome focus on the environment, alternative energy, infrastructure and job creation is in the offing--a good thing indeed.
But it is hard to discern any movement toward a wholesale rethinking of the dominant role of the market in our society. No one is questioning the impulse to rehabilitate the consumer market as the driver of American commerce. Or to keep commerce as the foundation of American public and private life, even at the cost of rendering other cherished American values--like pluralism, the life of the spirit and the pursuit of (nonmaterial) happiness--subordinate to it.
Economists and politicians across the spectrum continue to insist that the challenge lies in revving up inert demand. For in an economy that has become dependent on consumerism to the tune of 70 percent of GDP, shoppers who won't shop and consumers who don't consume spell disaster. Yet it is precisely in confronting the paradox of consumerism that the struggle for capitalism's soul needs to be waged.
The crisis in global capitalism demands a revolution in spirit--fundamental change in attitudes and behavior. Reform cannot merely rush parents and kids back into the mall; it must encourage them to shop less, to save rather than spend. If there's to be a federal lottery, the Obama administration should use it as an incentive for saving, a free ticket, say, for every ten bucks banked. Penalize carbon use by taxing gas so that it's $4 a gallon regardless of market price, curbing gas guzzlers and promoting efficient public transportation. And how about policies that give producers incentives to target real needs, even where the needy are short of cash, rather than to manufacture faux needs for the wealthy just because they've got the cash?
Or better yet, take in earnest that insincere MasterCard ad, and consider all the things money can't buy (most things!). Change some habits and restore the balance between body and spirit. Refashion the cultural ethos by taking culture seriously. The arts play a large role in fostering the noncommercial aspects of society. It's time, finally, for a cabinet-level arts and humanities post to foster creative thinking within government as well as throughout the country. Time for serious federal arts education money to teach the young the joys and powers of imagination, creativity and culture, as doers and spectators rather than consumers.
Recreation and physical activity are also public goods not dependent on private purchase. They call for parks and biking paths rather than multiplexes and malls. Speaking of the multiplex, why has the new communications technology been left almost entirely to commerce? Its architecture is democratic, and its networking potential is deeply social. Yet for the most part, it has been put to private and commercial rather than educational and cultural uses. Its democratic and artistic possibilities need to be elaborated, even subsidized.
Of course, much of what is required cannot be leveraged by government policy alone, or by a stimulus package and new regulations over the securities and banking markets. A cultural ethos is at stake. For far too long our primary institutions--from education and advertising to politics and entertainment--have prized consumerism above everything else, even at the price of infantilizing society. If spirit is to have a chance, they must join the revolution.
The costs of such a transformation will undoubtedly be steep, since they are likely to prolong the recession. Capitalists may be required to take risks they prefer to socialize (i.e., make taxpayers shoulder them). They will be asked to create new markets rather than exploit and abuse old ones; to simultaneously jump-start investments and inventions that create jobs and help generate those new consumers who will buy the useful and necessary things capitalists make once they start addressing real needs (try purifying tainted water in the Third World rather than bottling tap water in the First!).
The good news is, people are already spending less, earning before buying (using those old-fashioned layaway plans) and feeling relieved at the shopping quasi-moratorium. Suddenly debit cards are the preferred plastic. Parental "gatekeepers" are rebelling against marketers who treat their 4-year-olds as consumers-to-be. Adults are questioning brand identities and the infantilization of their tastes. They are out in front of the politicians, who still seem addicted to credit as a cure-all for the economic crisis.
And Barack Obama? We elected a president committed in principle to deep change. Rather than try to back out of the mess we are in, why not find a way forward? What if Obama committed the United States to reducing consumer spending from 70 percent of GDP to 50 percent over the next ten years, bringing it to roughly where Germany's GDP is today? The Germans have a commensurate standard of living and considerably greater equality. Imagine all the things we could do without having to shop: play and pray, create and relate, read and walk, listen and procreate--make art, make friends, make homes, make love.
Sound too soft? Too idealistic? If we are to survive the collapse of the unsustainable consumer capitalism that has possessed our body politic over the past three decades, idealism must become the new realism. For if the contest is between the material body defined by solipsistic acquisitiveness and the human spirit defined by imagination and compassion, then a purely technical economic response is what will be too soft, promising little more than a restoration of that shopaholic hell of hyper-consumerism that occasioned the current disaster.
There are epic moments in history, often catalyzed by catastrophe, that permit fundamental cultural change. The Civil War not only brought an end to slavery but knit together a wounded country, opened the West and spurred capitalist investment in ways that created the modern American nation. The Great Depression legitimized a radical expansion of democratic interventionism; but more important, it made Americans aware of how crucial equality and social justice (buried in capitalism's first century) were to America's survival as a democracy.
Today we find ourselves in another such seminal moment. Will we use it to rethink the meaning of capitalism and the relationship between our material bodies and the spirited psyches they are meant to serve? Between the commodity fetishism and single-minded commercialism that we have allowed to dominate us, and the pluralism, heterogeneity and spiritedness that constitute our professed national character?
President Obama certainly inspired many young people to think beyond themselves--beyond careerism and mindless consumerism. But our tendency is to leave the "higher" things to high-minded rhetoric and devote policy to the material. Getting people to understand that happiness cannot be bought, and that consumerism wears out not only the sole and the wallet but the will and the soul--that capitalism cannot survive long-term on credit and consumerism--demands programs and people, not just talk.
The convergence of Obama's election and the collapse of the global credit economy marks a moment when radical change is possible. But we will need the new president's leadership to turn the economic disaster into a cultural and democratic opportunity: to make service as important as selfishness (what about a national service program, universal and mandatory, linked to education?); to render community no less valid than individualism (lost social capital can be re-created through support for civil society); to make the needs of the spirit as worthy of respect as those of the body (assist the arts and don't chase religion out of the public square just because we want it out of City Hall); to make equality as important as individual opportunity ("equal opportunity" talk has become a way to avoid confronting deep structural inequality); to make prudence and modesty values no less commendable than speculation and hubris (saving is not just good economic policy; it's a beneficent frame of mind). Such values are neither conservative nor liberal but are at once cosmopolitan and deeply American. Their restoration could inaugurate a quiet revolution.
The struggle for the soul of capitalism is, then, a struggle between the nation's economic body and its civic soul: a struggle to put capitalism in its proper place, where it serves our nature and needs rather than manipulating and fabricating whims and wants. Saving capitalism means bringing it into harmony with spirit--with prudence, pluralism and those "things of the public" (res publica) that define our civic souls. A revolution of the spirit.
Is the new president up to it? Are we?
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


68 Comments so far
Show AllI think the consumers (the people) are the soul of Capitalism, but if we have no soul, neither does capitalism. One does indeed lead, the other follows.
One sign that we have a soul is investing in more planet friendly, community friendly, activities.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
Dump the word "soul". This medieval concept from the get was mind control verbiage by the Holy Church. There is no soul. As metaphor it is even less useful. Of course, the bottom of our shoes have soles. A good place for them to be so that we can constantly step on them. Another fitting but useless metaphor.
As science is proving, there is an area of the brain that lights up only when in states of prayer or meditation. It creates an unique experience of well being and leads to answers that otherwise seem out of our reach.
That area of the brain might be called our soul brain.
But if you have a word that makes more sense to the times, I'm all for it, soul could indeed have way too much baggage to be useful.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
I don't know if science can ever really take the place of spirituality as I'm still in the middle of learning spirituality even at my age.
Terrance Mitchell
Redfield, South Dakota
Jesus - a man who probably lived and died a couple of thousand years ago - possibly said something, so it must be right. The bible says so. No further thinking needed. How lucky for us that Jesus said everything worth saying, so noone need think much more. Jesus did some thinking a few thousand years ago, therefore we need think no more. Q.E.D. It's all been done and said before, we need to add no more. Nothing new under the sun, no new circumstance appears - ever. The Biosphere's carrying capacity will always support those who believe what Jesus said, although that was some time ago. When apparently proved wrong, we only need to believe it harder.
Right? - Well, NO.
YES to public and transparent steering of the finance-technical steerers of the capitalism that steers US, the public. The good flow of circulation between the center and rim of society must be restored to function well. Like the magnetic field-lines around a magnetic core can beautifully coordinate the material magnetic dipoles in the field around that core, we are similar magnetic material beings.
The steering of the steerers starts with taking the private profit out of the issuing of public currency. That means no profiting interest (other than maintenance cost, to counter the ca. 1,33 % annual decay) on the public infrastructure which the currency of last resort (the dollar, while it lasts) amounts to.
Big struggle to realign our system with US and meanwhile US with the Biosphere is coming up ahead. We are all one Biosphere. The thinking the Biosphere does happens partly in each of us. Thus we need to keep some thought on where our thinking comes from. "We're all outgrowths on this planet, working on this planet's growth".
"The Soul of Capitalism?"
Capitalism has no soul. Its simply an economic system. One that when used properly has provided to most good for the most people.
Unregulated Capitalism without oversight produces what we have now. Restoring the system to what it should be will restore our economy. Business must follow, not lead.
Anyone that believes it will be replaced or changed should revise their opinion in mine.
.Jesus saves, why dont you? An essay question from an economics course at Michigan.
Capitalism is certainly an economics system, and one that requires constant and stringent regulation to keep it from eating itself. Business, AND GOVERNMENT both must follow and not lead.
While you call for a restoration, I believe there is nothing back there to restore to. What I believe is that we face a choice of creeping fascism in which our corporate world plays an ever increasing role in the decision making of our elected officials through any number of devices or an engagement in the principles of socialism, adding that political philosophy to government where applicable.
Fire away ,Thomas.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Ardee displays symptoms of Far Leftism disease and needs serious mental counseling for keeping hate lists no different from Richard Nixon. Ardee can either learn the true meaning of capitalism or leave the country and sit in some socialist country and get lost.
Terrance Mitchell
Redfield, South Dakota
I am dissappointed in you Terrance be nice to ardee your both on the same side. Capitalism and socialism can blend very well with each other look at Norway, Sweden, Denmark and much of Europe. I might include some Muslim countries. The USA has adopted about four or five tenets of the ten point Communist Manifesto as standard practice. ---- Peace----------------------------------------------------------------
I'll be nice to ardee when he apologizes first. Look, I'm not used to the idea of European socialism even though I don't have much to benefit from the current capitalism. I'd much rather we fix the current capitalism for what it's worth. The conservatives and liberals have each deployed their versions of socialism and I just don't like either of them at the moment.
Terrance Mitchell
Redfield, South Dakota
ardee
Nothing to fire at! That is the other opinion of the situation. I can't chastize you for being wrong occasionally....can I?
.Hee, no not at all. If ever I am wrong you are certainly free to do so....Notice how hard it is to communicate of late, with the door open anything can wander in.....
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
I have taken note of that. There does seem to be a draft right enough and I have heard scurrying and scratching..........
"A Revolution in Spirit." This article comes very close to identifying the problem with capitalism. The problem with capitalism is that it does not work will with huge populations. As we are witnessing now the need for constant growth and consumption strangles the concept of capitalism.
I suppose that the apologists of capitalism are as numerous as the apologists of Empire, and that Mr. Barber is to be counted among them.
How many more recessions, depressions, crises, hordes of suffering, unemployed people, of children lacking medical care, of families thrown out of their homes, of people robbed of their life-savings and pensions by cynical financiers, of millions of nearly illiterate citizens (yes, that is what happening right in the U.S.), and uncountable other ills generated by capitalism, will be needed before a university professor such as Mr. Barber finally gets it?
How goes the saying about being unable to learn from experience and about persisting with the same scenario in the face of repeated failure? Is not the stubborn refusal to learn from prior experience contrary to the very spirit of scientific inquiry, which one would assume a university professor would want to uphold? Is it not a sign of a severe disconnection from reality?
One could also liken this resistance to reality to a form of religious consciousness. Indeed, religious man typically learns only with great difficulty: see how long it took the Vatican to accept heliocentrism and other scientific discoveries, and witness its stubborn resistance to contraception in the face of hundreds of millions of people's misery.
The response to this exercise in the poverty -- or should I say the sheer misery -- of a certain type of academic thinking was given on this site on January 21, 2009, by Michael Parenti in his article "Capitalism Self-Inflicted Apocalypse."
Capitalism, as a mode of production, is very simply doomed because of its emphasis on unlimited growth, which is not compatible with the finitude, the limited character, of Earth's resources. However, given the psychological traits exhibited by academic authorities such as Mr. Barber, and, worse, given the dismal mental landscape of our wonderful leaders, capitalism will in all likelihood not be abolished deliberately. However, the Earth will abolish it, by sheer force and immense, catastrophic suffering. Just consider capitalism's energetic Achilles' heel: once the oil goes, capitalism will stagger towards its end. No plentiful energy, no growth.
Capitalism is not a political system, and its twentieth-century history shows very graphically that it is in fact compatible with just about any regime: for example, with a phony democracy such as the one Japan has had since the end of World War II (basically, a one party system; see the analysis of Chalmer Johnson in his book "Blowback"), with Germany's Nazi dictatorhip, with Franco's brand of authoritarian rule, with Mussolini's fascism, with the Greek military junta (installed by courtesy of the CIA), with the terror regime of Suharto in Indonesia (1965-1998; another gift to the world from the CIA), with a theocracy such as that of Saudia Arabia, with Communist China, et cetera.
As long as a political regime can accomodate the greed, venality, disregard for human decency (not to mention human rights), the plundering of the ecosphere (its animals, plants, minerals, water, etc.) characteristic of capitalism (all of it euphemistically called 'growth'), capital will move in and make itself at home.
In other words, Mr. Barber, capitalism does not need democracy and couldn't care less about democracy.
good points abendland. all of us, to some degree, are or have been taken in to by the apparent material prosperity that capitalism seems to create. we ignore the dark underside of capitalism (the homeless, etc.) in the centers of capital, but more importantly the wars of capital and its ruthless exploitation of underdeveloped regions. a lot of people are paying a steep price for the 'prosperity of capitalism.'
it's only when capitalism is in crisis, forcing the centers of capital to hyper-exploit their own populations, that certain lefty types begin to say, oh NOW there is a problem. no, the problem has always been there. you just didn't want to see it til it started threatening you or your neighbors or family or friends.
Agreed.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
"Can the market system finally be made to serve us? Or will we continue to serve it?"
How logical is this statement? We have buyers and sellers. The sellers serve the buyers, the buyers buy what serves them. We are not in a slave market, we are not forced to buy anything, they offer good or bad, we choose good or bad. Together we create the market that exists.
I want to add that capitalism is only one half of the equation. Like the government and the people, our markets have been divided into two halves, those who sell and those who buy. A trick being played that empowers the capitalists is the message that they are the only ones with power, the only ones who matter. But the consumer purchasing with their private dollar has just as much power. In fact I was just listening to NPR and an economic expert said that what we need to fix our problem is more consumption, as our system relies on it to survive. The crux of our problem is there is no longer any disposable income in our system to consume with since the tanking of the capitalist ship of investment took disposable consumer income down with it. Obviously we need a separation of capitalist profit investment and savings and consumer income investment and savings. This is not rocket science but it would undermine the idea of the wealthy that they are the only ones with power and in control of the world. The bonfire of the vanities.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
John K Galbraith wrote a book "American Capitalism" emphasizing how the two halves might become equal--the theory of "Countervailing Power." You could gain much by reading all his works.
Also, Barber says "market system," not just "market;" for it's the "system" that is amiss, not market basics, as you note.
I appreciate this advice karlof1, thank you.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
What a Utopian delusion. Just like the U.S. goverment, this article completely ignores the root problem of no acountablility in government or the market. Capitalism cannot be fair to all with a toothless SEC and corrupt Dept of Justice that allows scores of Bernard Madoffs to not even be investigated unless they gaff their way into the papers. Mercantile trade has always been a part of homo sapien and it always will be to some extent. Trade has been going on well before the advent of wrinting 5,000 years ago. What should have been the new emerging markets were stem-cell research and renewable energy; but big oil polluted mens souls in washington. And Big everything else has enslaved a whole race into finacial suppporters and consumers of crap. We can't have a free market in accordance with adam smith's priciples of capitalism if we don't restore competition in the marketplace. This means no more ogilopilies! We must break the Fortune 500 into the Fortune 5,000,000,000.
If I could buy goods and services from my local neighbors I would; but everytime that starts, here comes the local and fed government to tax, permit, and harrass cottage industry out of business.
As ususal, this huge government (which never serves us any more) is the problem.
We should just get rid of it and start over.
Tom
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." - Thomas Jefferson
I agree with you that federal government is too big, but only in the sense that it's powers in our life are too big.
As counter intuitive as this may sound I think local government is too small. Since government is merely a representative for the peoples voice, and the number of people has grown exponentially, but the representation has not......how do we realistically expect to be heard???
It is not possible.
I think that to fix this problem, we should have more local federal power and say.
A president for the west coast as well as the east perhaps, or even more. Multiple heads of federal power instead of one president trying to do it all. He/she cannot.
Our system must change, regulation must grow, but the peoples power to regulate must grow with it. That can be accomplished by a more direct form of government, if that is what we want. Or more representatives for our voice, because through personal experience, we don't have enough. So to a degree writing letters is an empty formality, I know, I have done it and been told that my rep. was too busy to help everyone that wrote to him.
Also the excuse that the system is too big and complicated for those in power to regulate well, which I have heard over and over is not an excuse for the corruption we see.
Ok, that was my little rant.
Thanks anyone who listened.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
"Our system must change, regulation must grow, but the peoples power to regulate must grow with it. That can be accomplished by a more direct form of government, if that is what we want. Or more representatives for our voice, because through personal experience, we don't have enough. So to a degree writing letters is an empty formality, I know, I have done it and been told that my rep. was too busy to help everyone that wrote to him."
Maybe you can try paying attention to local elections for a change and then your rep will start listening.
Terrance Mitchell
Redfield, South Dakota
I agree with you with my whole heart. TMinSD! That may be the real problem for me and maybe for us all. I keep that as a strong possibility and have only in the last couple of years really become active as a citizen in the political arena. However my experience so far is disappointing and illuminating. But your main point which I believe that we must become the change we want to see, is so true, and such a great challenge.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
Uh, don't take it too hard. I do apologize for being a bit too rough there. I just got scared of all this Obama bashing or what appeared to be that. Don't give up the fight. If at first you don't succeed, keep trying. Good luck.
Terrance Mitchell
Redfield, South Dakota
Leea;
I need to apologize to you.Recently my sense of sardonic humor was misdireted at you.Usually I only use it against targets that are both known and powerful.It took these few days for a clear understanding of what I had done and it doesn't feel at all good.Hope that other regular CD participants don't hold a grudge against me either.
Again,I'm sorry.
Thank you..and welcome back klever, glad to see you.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
klever
Admirable.
Obama will try to do what he can within the limits to repair the mess the current form of capitalism has gotten us into. However, we all need to remember that back when FDR did it, he had the strong support of the public and strong unity in labor unlike today where the electorate is too individualist with all this self-reliant yankee mentality and a severely weakened labor front which started under Reagan and turned into another corrupt monied interest in the 1990s and this decade. Despite the advantages FDR had, he faced very hostile opposition in Congress and even 5 rightwing assassination attempts with one of them clearly known and almost successful while the other 4 were weak attempts which fizzled out. Until we the electorate can unite, I find it unlikely that Obama will be able to pass on the major reform that is clearly needed.
Capitalism is neither a political system nor an economic system of production. It is a system of private ownership of the means to profit WITHOUT production, namely of private ownership of central banks. It is a means of social and economic control by and for the banking elites. This control is wielded by means of a privatized currency subject to interest.
The essence of the banking elites' power, derived from their ownership "rights", is their protected monopoly as the sole legal arbiters of debt and credit. That is, they are pretend creditors that insinuate themselves into the transaction between the true creditor and the debtor, forcing the use of their paper to write promises to pay (loan contracts) and extracting interest from the debtor on the pretense that they are taking a risk. But there is no risk since the "money" loaned is actually created with but an accounting entry.
With this power to issue currency and create debt they have instituted a privatized currency subject to interest - the true engine of the concentration of wealth. Since a currency subject to interest creates inherent, irreversible and ultimately terminal debt, this can be seen as the essence of our monetary system's - our economy's - trend toward self-destruction.
That a currency subject to interest terminates itself in insoluble debt has been proven mathematically by Mike Montagne, who's solution, Mathematically Perfected Economy™ (MPE) therefore prohibits interest. The essence of his solution is at once an economic principle and an ethical one. The principle is that of non-intervention; a principle which is found at the heart of Democratic Theory. It is the economic corollary to the conception of civil liberties which seeks to guarantee for each individual all those freedoms which are consistent with the same guarantee for every other individual. In its economic manifestation the principle of non-intervention can be stated as follows: It is every prospective debtor's right to issue their promise to pay, free of extrinsic manipulation, adulteration, or exploitation of that promise, or the natural opportunity to make good on it. If we want economic democracy, this principle absolutely demands constitution-level recognition.
What central bankers have going is not an economy but a deliberate system of dispossession of wealth and productivity by means of their privatized, interest-bearing currency. The terminal debt made unavoidable by this system is now upon us. Are we going to allow it to tear our lives and our country and our world apart, or are we going to press for solution? The solution, Mathematically Perfected Economy™, creates the economic equality that is both necessary and sufficient for the realization of a just and sustainable economy.
truly great post! but i wonder that it does not imply that if we simply put the credit mechanism in the hands of the electorate, all will be well, and that we can leave the rest of the means of production in private hands.
What you are describing is the latest manifestation of capitalism.
Capitalism has gone through several phases since its inception: mercantile capital, the capitalism of the early manufactures (in eighteenth century England), the capitalism of large industry, and now finance capital.
There is no incompatability between what you are saying and the description of capitalism as a mode of production.
Good observation. Note that at each phase the concentration of ownership is accelerated.
It would be helpful if Mike were to also come up with a mathematically perfected social formula, because our economic ills do not seem to be the cause of our social structure but the effect of that same social structure.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
This article starts out great with some insightful quotes and good points, including:
"...the Obama economic team continue to think inside the economic box."
and,
"But it is hard to discern any movement toward a wholesale rethinking of the dominant role of the market in our society..
And then it just stops making sense. To get a heads up on why that is and what's really wrong with this piece, start near the bottom first--with a sentense like this:
"The struggle for the soul of capitalism is..."
Or perhaps, this phrase:
"Saving capitalism means bringing it into harmony with spirit--with prudence, pluralism and those "things of the public" (res publica) that define our civic souls. A revolution of the spirit."
This is a good example of today's typical American identity crisis: a war of the minds within the same head. That is, a head divided against itself. On the one hand--I mean head, I mean mind, you have the identity of a consumer living in a capitalism. In the other mind, it's the identity remnants of the citizen in a democracy. Together it's a mixed up mess. A walking (and writing) consum-itizen Sybil.
If it's true that most Americans today--to some extent like Barber--are a bit identity conflicted, I suspect his particular vision of spirited spiritedness would be not unlike the blind leading the blind.
Haven't we been following such like-minded and like-visioned "leaders" for the last 30 years?
My guess is you need a clue as to what "drives" people--in a free society--to bring about reform. At the very least, the motivation has to be more than just self-interest or even good intentions for it to work.
Today, evidence of that is everywhere.
Indeed, it seems we need to reconnect to something greater than ourselves, and our traditional models of that greater reality just don't fit the bill.
But one common theme that seems to be contrary to something greater than ourselves, is the theme that we are greater than some other. If a greater something model made us humble enough to envision equality, and now that vision is shattering, it follows that our ability to see equality and see it materialize in our society is failing.
President Obama as model seems precarious for a variety of reasons. So what do we have now to guide us? I think it might be something greater in ourselves something we originally had and lost while our minds were developing. However it is noted by some authorities on the subject that in our time of need, that greatness in ourselves will step in with no real effort on our part but to just let the process unfold.
We will see. I think it has already began. President Obama may be the catalyst that kicks the whole thing into motion for many.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
"Indeed, it seems we need to reconnect to something greater than ourselves..."
I get the impression that is what Barber is trying to say as well. But the result of this in his article is that his arguments for human and social betterment suffer the worse for it. That is, because his arguments lack the unique incentive, "drive" and the kind of natural and greater connection to others that only the ideal of freedom provides--he's left with a piece that is flat.
And the weak substitution of the vague notion of "spirit" doesn't help matters.
In short: the Democrats should love it.
What a blessedly insightful reply. Thank you.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
Wow. Thanks Leea for the compliment. But I think it's just common sense--you know? It's like Barber is intentionally avoiding the idea of freedom as a means. Instead he provides this laundry list of admirable but unconnected thou shalts. I mean, why not just present 2 or 3 good examples and then focus on explaining WHY they relate to the common thread of expanding freedom?
Why avoid the ideal of freedom?
That's the only thing that will countervail the narrow self-interest and greed that drives today's unbridled ambition.
.
"I think it might be something greater in ourselves something we originally had and lost while our minds were developing."
.
“If you have come to help me, you are wasting your time. But if you have come because your liberation is bound up with mine, then let us work together.” --Lila Watson
PIPEDREAMS Says: "If it seems to good to be true, odds are it's not true!"
Well one thing is for sure TARP seems to have failed and failed miserably. I think the reason Paulson wanted no controls or much oversight is that he was really just the look out for the bank robbers that would take the $$ our stupid Congress hand them. His job was to keep an eye out for any cops ( regulators) that might follow the money trail he and the others were trying desperately to conceal. Well, it looks as though with Congresses help the robbery is complete. Now on to the next part of this drama the so called Stimulus bill. Why do any of you believe this will amount to much more then TARP?
YES to public and transparent steering of the finance-technical steerers of the capitalism that steers US, the public. The good flow of circulation between the center and rim of society must be restored to function well. Like the magnetic field-lines around a magnetic core when unobstructed can beautifully coordinate the material magnetic dipoles in the field around that core, we are similar magnetic material beings.
The steering of the steerers starts with taking the private profit out of the issuing of public currency. That means no profiting interest (other than maintenance cost, to counter the ca. 1,33 % annual decay) on the public infrastructure which the currency of last resort (the dollar, while it lasts) amounts to.
Big struggle to realign our system with US and meanwhile US with the Biosphere is coming up ahead. We are all one Biosphere. The thinking the Biosphere does happens partly in each of us. Thus we need to keep some thought on where our thinking comes from.
"We're all outgrowths on this planet, working on this planet's growth".
(And pls forgive this partial reposting of a reply in the main thread.)
Yet another excellent comment.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
"It's time, finally, for a cabinet-level arts and humanities post to foster creative thinking within government as well as throughout the country. Time for serious federal arts education money to teach the young the joys and powers of imagination, creativity and culture, as doers and spectators rather than consumers." What Benjamin R. Barber doesn't realize is that the purpose of any type of capitalism will not support this idea. What is, and has been, the purpose of public education over the past hundred years? Do you seriously believe that Obama wants to change this trend of dumbing-down our children? He chose Arne Duncan as Secretary of Education! For thoughts and articles about Arne Duncan and American education and schooling, see http://www.freewebs.com/thegorge/Education.htm
"Speaking of the multiplex, why has the new communications technology been left almost entirely to commerce? Its architecture is democratic, and its networking potential is deeply social. Yet for the most part, it has been put to private and commercial rather than educational and cultural uses. Its democratic and artistic possibilities need to be elaborated, even subsidized." Another pipedream from Barber. The American Empire will need to expire before educational and cultural uses are introduced into our 'communications'.
"Its architecture is democratic." You can't be serious! Have you not heard about the 1996 Telecommunications Act? Are you unaware of the almost complete lack of real information that is available to the general public? When some "liberals" only source of information comes from the slanted goons controlling and sponsoring NPR, we are in deep doo-doo.
"to make the needs of the spirit as worthy of respect as those of the body (assist the arts and don't chase religion out of the public square just because we want it out of City Hall)." Sure, make the needs of the spirit as worthy of respect, but this is impossible through organized religions. Barber brags about the need for critical thinking and yet he is for promoting organized religious beliefs? Has Barber ever actually read the old testament bible?
"a struggle to put capitalism in its proper place, where it serves our nature and needs rather than manipulating and fabricating whims and wants."
Capitalism in its proper place would be getting rid of it. It was never meant to serve our nature and needs - and it never will. Before that is possible you'll need to dismantle the entire construct of Corporate America, which of course would be a very good thing for "we the people." But we're not going to do it via Obama and our thoroughly corrupt duopoly.
"Is the new president up to it? Are we?" Obama is up to promoting the needs of the American Empire. And have you tried to get the attention of people these days? Most have been so dumbed-down that's it's hopeless trying to reach them - unless you have their cell number.
First, we need to come to grips with the facts of life in the American Empire. Then, we'll need to act accordingly. Ignoring our reality with fantasized thoughts only distracts us from what we need to do.
Well if it is true "most have been so dumbed down" how would it be hard to reach them?
A smile, a hello, a sincere belief that they are good in spite of what they know. Embrace what they know, embrace them where they are, and you might find them embracing you back.
Try reaching someone from those simple precepts, you may be surprised.
What happens when snowflakes stick together?...............friends come together and have snow ball fights. :)
Leea
I agree with your points on the ways to reach people. But I think you missed my point.
I've been looking at the public spaces that we all share over the past decade or so. The era of pre-cell phone technology vs. the situation we now have in 2009 is day vs. night.
As so many people are glued to their cell phones, how can you expect to reach them - without having their cell number. I'm trying to be funny, but there is reality here as well.
Most of us are so caught up in technological distractions that we frequently miss the chance to made real, human contacts.
An example: walk around any college campus during a break in classes and count the numbers of students who are so into their cell conversations (usually to someone they just saw hours ago) that they miss any opportunity to meet real people.
Capitalism is mean spirited.
Not if it is properly regulated.
Terrance Mitchell
Redfield, South Dakota
I suppose you also believe that the Earth is flat.
Only if its unregulated....