Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace

The Economic Crisis Isn't All Bad; It's a Chance for Us and Obama to Reimagine How We Live Our Lives

By Benjamin R. Barber, The Nation. Posted January 28, 2009.


Capitalism is on its knees and now we have a chance to create higher ideals beyond career climbing and mindless consumerism.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

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!).


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: capitalism, consumerism, economy, spending, recession, saving, gdp, financial crisis

Benjamin R. Barber, a distinguished senior fellow at Demos, is the author of Jihad vs. McWorld and Consumed: How Markets Corrupt Children, Infantilize Adults and Swallow Citizens Whole.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
been to this movie
Posted by: Talleyrand on Jan 28, 2009 12:35 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mindless consumerism..... I grew up opposing that. Then the whole country switched with uncle Ooze in power, Happy Days were here again.... Everyone always saying "Move on"... Well, we are back to square one. There are some basic things in our society that will not change, they go back to the 1600s, and that is a completely obsessive inability to look back at the crap we have created. Folks, GWB, Reagan, etc. (and I'd say even Clinton) were not created in a vacuum. They are not the cause of anything, they are a symptom. And the left should look itself in the mirror as much as the right.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Amen! Amen! Posted by: Windwhistler
This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
» This is obviously commercial spam Posted by: socialpsych
» SPAM Posted by: Bliss Doubt
Americans are ready for real change but Congress is in bed with Wall Street banksters
Posted by: Jay Randal on Jan 28, 2009 1:25 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Unregulated capitalism is really fascism using a nicer name for it. Majority of Americans like the Social Security retirement system which is socialism. Democratic socialism is the wave of the future, but cannot be achieved until present membership of Congress retire or are removed in elections. The only way out of the new depression is socialism type programs.

Unfortunately Pres. Obama is too beholden to Wall Street to succeed in transforming capitalism to socialism in America. He is on the road to being another Hoover, so We the People are forced to wait a bit longer for another FDR and New Deal.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Socialism in is not communism Posted by: topbrick
There is no such thing as 'benign' capitalism
Posted by: Gegner on Jan 28, 2009 1:50 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nor is there any such thing as 'free' markets.

If we are to put the welfare of society ahead of the 'profit motive', we need to eliminate 'income streams' from our economy.

Let those that produce reap (all) of the rewards of their labor.

This can be accomplished by altering the 'nature' of money.

Money is only useful to the individual.

Therefore, your money should be for you and only you.

You can't give it to anyone else.

The only thing that can be bought and sold are products, not labor.

Labor is to be 'rewarded' not 'traded'.

These are pretty simple concepts, so simple it's remarkable we have suffered so long with labor being commodified.

You work to earn money then trade the money for what you want. How much simpler can you get?

We won't enjoy 'freedom' until our labor is 'ours' (and not an 'income stream' for our so-called 'employer'.

We cannot prosper under capitalism because the incentives are wrong.

Under 'A Simple Plan', we all prosper.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Ooooooo... Posted by: Cybershaman
Tom Miller
Posted by: milltom on Jan 28, 2009 1:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Even if the United States could adopt new values in the way it allocates its wealth, there is the rest of the world trying to emulate our consumer society. Having just emerged from a sea of happy shoppers buying the cheapest imaginable knick knacks for the TET new year in Hanoi, how is this to change, especially when one considers the bare existence most live? Ironically, with the latest economic downturn, creating a balanced, sustainable environmentally sound economy has dropped to the bottom of priorities according to a recent New York Times survey.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

mike Munk
Posted by: lastmarx1 on Jan 28, 2009 1:53 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Eeducing consumerism to only 50% of the ecnomy is what passes for bold reform these days from those afraid of socialism.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What's Any Economy Worth That Isn't Based On Value?...
Posted by: gazooks on Jan 28, 2009 2:14 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...And, of course, what is value(d)?

The author suggests in the end that we redeem consumerism by, well, a new and improved consumerism.

Like Brandeis University's inclination to close the Rose Art Museum, and dump a very worthy collection of donated American art to fund "core", programs in a fit of fiscal frenzy, there's an apparent hollowness in what that "core" produces in terms of value. Art, it seems to it's governors, is only worth money, bad money at that.

If a society, particularly an academy, can't recognize value and it's meaning to sustainability when it's staring you in the face, from say 20 feet, how can we hope to reconcile our preoccupation with volume as it's substitute and shift paradigm?

It is a quality vs. quantity issue and until we understand that sacrificing the former for the latter is what has us standing on the brink, we are not only diminished, we're doomed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Whose academy? Posted by: yesman
Barber's Article Has SOME Good Points, But...
Posted by: Jayzer on Jan 28, 2009 2:31 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Barber's article has some good points, but making national service "universal and compulsory" reeks of involuntary servitude, even if it is linked to education and even if the point is to make students aware of the importance of "community."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Except... Posted by: Cybershaman
» Good point Posted by: Quicksilver
The Real Challenge
Posted by: Sparks56 on Jan 28, 2009 2:32 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Much of what the author suggest, good ideas all, may come to pass just because people will have no money. The term "disposable income", (throw-away money?!) will become absurd. That by itself will be a good thing. Another term that hopefully might fall by the wayside is refering to human beings as "consumers". But I digress.
The real challenge is to create an economic model that works that doesn't rely on the pyramid. Sooner or later there has to be an economic model that does not rely on an ever expanding base of cheap labor, and an ever expanding market of consumers. Every "great" society, every empire, from Egypt to Greece to Rome to Btitain to America has been based on this model, and crumbled and died when that cheap labor base ceased to expand and/or shrank. China's recent economic rise, and the last bubble of consumerism in the US, was fueled by millions of impoverished people from the countryside working in factories for next to nothing. The same goes for India. It works only as long as each generation of cheap labor is economically lifted by a another, bigger, wave of cheap labor. It's the pyramid scheme. It must continue to expand and when that expansion ceases, it crumbles and dies.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The Real Challenge Posted by: Jayzer
» RE: The Real Challenge Posted by: Sparks56
Don't look for our leaders to lead.
Posted by: DrBrian on Jan 28, 2009 2:33 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Change to a less materialistic, less consumptive, greener lifestyle will come from the bottom up, not from the top down. Obama's and the economists' fix for our current woes isn't to change the paradigm, but to revive it by spending. Collectively, we can push for more environmentally sound, pro-education infrastructure changes as part of the stimulus package, and individually we can decrease our negative footprints. But don't look for our leaders to lead.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Of course not ... Posted by: tommy_slothrop
Energy Independence
Posted by: beyondgreen on Jan 28, 2009 3:37 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We need to utilize everything in out power to reduce our dependence on foreign oil including using our own natural resources.OPEC will continue to cut production until they achieve their desired 80-100. per barrel. The high cost of fuel this past year seriously damaged our economy and society. Oil is finite. We are using oil globally at the rate of 2X faster than new oil is being discovered. We need to take some of these billions in bail out bucks and bail ourselves out of our dependence on foreign oil. Jeff Wilson has a really good new book out called The Manhattan Project of 2009 Energy Independence Now. He explores our uses of oil besides gasoline, our depletion, out reserves and stores as well as viable options to replace oil.Oil is finite, it will run out in the not too distant future. WE need to take some of these billions in bail out bucks and bail America out of it's dependence on foreign oil. The historic high price of gas this past year did serious damage to our economy and society.If all gasoline cars, trucks, and SUV's instead had plug-in electric drive trains, the amount of electricity needed to replace gasoline is about equal to the estimated wind energy potential of the state of North Dakota. WE should never allow others to have that much power over our economy again. Every member of congress needs to read this book.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It May Not Be All Bad For The Third World - But It's a Total Disaster For Western Civilisation
Posted by: tony_opmoc on Jan 28, 2009 3:47 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
People still don't get it. We've finally been rumbled. Over the last 40 years we've been moving all our real assets - the things that create real wealth - outside of Western Civilisation. Not only have we transferred our assets but we've also transferred our skills.

Bankers amd politicians don't apparently understand real wealth. They seem to think its numbers on a computer screen. This has also applied to the governments of 3rd World countries who have quite happily allowed their populations to be turned into our slaves - because we gave their personal bank accounts sets of large numbers.

But we've been paying for all this stuff - these massive imports with funny money - or in reality enormous unsustainable levels of debt.

The crux of the matter is that we have no real goods and services of sufficient quality and volume produced in our own countries to pay for our imports. The fact that we've got away with it for so long is amazing - but now they want paying with something tangible and we have nothing to offer. They not only want paying for what we are currently receiving - but they want back payment for all the stuff over the last 40 years.

So imports dramatically reduce to a trickle. This may actually be good for 3rd World populations as they will stand a chance to escape from slavery and the environmental destruction we have imposed.

But its a total disaster for us. Most of us don't do jobs of any tangible value. We don't create anything that anyone else wants to buy, and most of us have lost the skills to actually do so. We work in offices chasing bureaucracy feeding a system built on insanity. These jobs not only don't create anything, they don't even contribute to our most basic fundamental needs of survival.

Without imports how are we going to cope? Our society is in great danger of completely breaking down into a civil war with us all fighting for survival. Whilst the US grows sufficient food to feed its own population, that population is armed to the teeth and will not be happy when the HDTV stops working.

In the UK we are probably even worse off. We may actually go bankrupt before the US - and are much more heavily dependent on imported food. Whilst we used to be self sufficient in energy - that is no longer the case - and we may actually have to re-open our coal pits just to have sufficient energy to survive.

In such a state of desperation green environmental policies go out of the window as will most conventional politicians. If you think the likes of Bush, Blair, Stalin and Hitler were bad this New Society could throw up tyrants worse than the World has ever seen.

Whilst its possible to live in poverty and be happy if that's where your origins are and you can see hope for gradual improvement, the reverse when your wealth disappears is totally horrendous. This in part, is because you simply do not have the basic skills to survive.

The cull is on. Go on a survival course. Grow your own food. Know your own local community.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» what is wealth? Posted by: Evelyn
» RE: what is wealth? Posted by: tony_opmoc
» Toiling masses of What? Posted by: edgar1
» The new Shock Doctrine Posted by: kegbot1
» RE: The new Shock Doctrine Posted by: tony_opmoc
» So true. Posted by: yesman
NOT SO FAST
Posted by: RAS1142 on Jan 28, 2009 3:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
LOOK BUSH WAS PUT IN OFFICE BUY THE SAME PEOPLE THAT PUT OBAMA THERE ALSO.BUSH'S JOB WAS TO BANKRUPT THIS COUNTRY . OPEN BORDERS TO LOWER THE LIVING WAGE, NAFTA AND CAFTA TO DESTROY THE MIDDLE CLASS, THE WARS AND THE BAILOUTS TO BANKRUPT AMERICA.
NOW OBAMA JOB IS TO GIVE US ENOUGH HOPE SO WE EXCEPT THAT THIS IS NOT GONG TO BE AMERICA AS WE NEW IT, WHEN HE ASKS FOR YOUR SERVICE, IT REALLY MEANS GET READ FOR SERVITUDE. AND THE COMING NORTH AMERICA UNION, OR JUST TO MAKE IT EASIER THE AMERICAN UNION. SO HERE'S WHAT TO DO GO TO NIGHT SCHOOL, STOP FOR GET THAT, NEVER MIND THAT, GO TO DAY SCHOOL BECAUSE YOU WONT HAVE A JOB ANYWAY AND LEARN SPANISH.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: NOT SO FAST Posted by: Quicksilver
» RE: NOT SO FAST Posted by: greenPuker
This Crisis is Not a Sign That Capitalism has Failed
Posted by: shill on Jan 28, 2009 4:04 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the government had not been so intent on giving corporate welfare to the big businesses this past 8 years,(actually a lot longer in some sectors, but Bush 2 was notorious for his corporate welfare policies) this might well not have happened, or at least not on this scale. Now we are told that these businesses must be bailed out further by the government, when in truth, had they been competitive to begin with, and had they practiced good business practices, this current crisis might never had happened. Yes, there ARE many bad side effects to a system where materialism becomes more important than anything else, but the economic meltdown we are currently experiencing is not the fault of free market economics. It's the result of government interference and "help" to companies that in their arrogance, believed they were too big to go belly up, indeed, SO big that they didn't HAVE to compete on the global market, and that if they got into trouble, the government would bail them out, which is EXACTLY what has happened. Capitalism is not a perfect system by any means. Greed left unchecked is disastrous. But whenever politicians in government want to "help," you had better hold onto your wallets! Because it is the average person ( AND their children, AND their childrens' children) who is going to end up paying for this type of cozy "arrangement" between big business and the politicians.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wrong
Posted by: BillSamuel on Jan 28, 2009 4:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
President Obama is not "committed . . . to deep change." In fact he is committed to opposing it, and killing people in support of his position. He said in his inaugural address, "We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense." The wealthiest demographic voted for him, seeing him as the surest supporter of the status quo.

An enormous stimulus package without saying where the money is coming from is not a good idea. He is saddling ordinary taxpayers for generations to come with a big debt they will have to pay off (mostly to people in other countries, as happens with all bankrupt nations). The debt service takes up a significant portion of the Federal budget, and that will grow. At some point, this means misery. You can't ignore reality forever. The measure is extremely irresponsible.

And I can't agree with Barber that fascism is the answer. And universal compulsory service is fascism.

This kind of nonsense from the "progressive" side demonstrates the sorry state of public dialogue today in this nation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Wrong Posted by: seazen
» RE: Wrong you are Posted by: Beck
Simple
Posted by: maxfactor on Jan 28, 2009 4:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Kill large companies (Ford and GM are the same coin, just different side) Intel needs to be broken up in small units, Google too. Phone, Rails, utilities belong to the state. Aircarriers they just cost and pollute, kill. Small local business can do e-cars, utilities much better. No transparent pricing, pricefixing and management forfeits private gains.
The rules are simple and straightforward so that even most dimwitted, marginaly educated entrepreneurs can follow.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Backing out of the mess or moving forward
Posted by: Growthbuster on Jan 28, 2009 5:07 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I remain amazed at how few are pointing out this opportunity to get off the consumerism treadmill. Would Obama's leadership help us make the shift? Probably, if he could politically survive the hostile response of so many who worship growth everlasting. But that survival is doubtful.

It's more likely we'll waste a lot of time and money trying to revive our failed system, which will eventually fail due to lack of resources. Still, let's keep trying to help our society learn the lessons we are living through. Bravo for this effort!

Dave Gardner
Producer/Director
Hooked on Growth: Our Misguided Quest for Prosperity
www.growthbusters.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Elementary change
Posted by: blondesprite on Jan 28, 2009 5:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wealth is, and always has been,the by-product of creativity. There has been a war on creativity and the arts, in general, for most of my life time.

The word art did not always conjure up images of dusty heads hanging in empty halls. It meant quite simply to put things together. Real Artists were crafts men and women making and trading needed, simple,useful and beautiful things.

In order to create art, one must be allowed to question, to stare into space for hours, to tinker, to seem to be doing little else than imagining. These abilities are not taught or encouraged in our schools.

Starting with elementary school, our children are punished and medicated for day dreaming, getting out of line, walking too fast or too slow, speaking with out permission and asking difficult questions.

They are put in school board approved uniforms so they learn to value colorless conformity over creativity or individual choice and to fear anything or anyone different.

This atmosphere is not conducive to creativity, invention or developing critical thinking skills.

In study after study, it has been well documented that children and adults who are exposed to the arts perform better in science and math.

Unfortunately, this fact escapes politicians, parents,school board trutees and board rooms.
As a result, our schools have pumped out generations of regurgitating, mindless, self serving, MBAs, Wall Street looters, Pharmaceutical Reps, overly specialized physicians and Lawyers.

This is why effective and lasting change must start at elementary levels.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Elementary change Posted by: tony_opmoc
» RE: lementary change Posted by: greenPuker
guess what, all you lower middle class working people-you've had it too good!
Posted by: zooeyhall on Jan 28, 2009 6:28 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hey Mr. Author....most people I know including myself have NOT been "consumerists" gobbling-up possesions and glorifying in our brand new SUV and huge house. Instead the last 8 years since the "recovery" from the last recession we have been doing our best just to hold our noses above the water.

Articles like this one--and many Alternet readers/posters--I strongly suspect are from the upper middle class. Yeah, maybe you can get some catharsis out of the current suffering of the little people. But don't make assumptions that the vast majority of your fellows have been living the high life the past years, as maybe you have been. Many of us have been struggling to keep up with making the payments on the 30 year mortgage on our 50 year old house. (I myself live in a modest ranch home built in 1970) Or trying to keep our 10 year old cars running (I drive a 90 Tempo and 86 Subaru). Trying to keep up with medical bills for the kids and worrying about your manufacturing job going overseas.

So now we read articles like this that seem to assume that we are all deserving of some sort of economic purgatory. Well for many of us we have not even been to the banquet that so many of the "Lexus liberals" seem to think we have. We haven't even had a chance to belly up to the table. The most we've done is had our noses pressed up against the window, looking in.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Soros is right...
Posted by: QuestionAuthority on Jan 28, 2009 6:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
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."

Soros is quite correct. Capitalism is not dead, but it does need an overhaul because it has been perverted by the billionaire class. The highest economic classes, in their haste to get even richer, have forgotten that those below them must have enough wealth to keep the system running. Just as a pump needs a certain amount of liquid to work, an economy needs a certain amount of liquidity and wealth to work. An empty pump doesn't work - and neither does an "empty" economy.

The rich have been insulated from their investment errors for too long by government actions that socialized their risk. This must be stopped. The rich need to re-learn that risk is risk, and that they stand the chance of losses for their riskier investments. That's why riskier investment gets higher returns (if it works), not to mention why it's called "venture capitalism."

The economy has to work for all, otherwise it is doomed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
» Spam Posted by: zipoka
Overproduction anyone?
Posted by: redstarwraith on Jan 28, 2009 6:55 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is curious that all the writing i've seen on our current economic downfall tends to ignore the fundamental problem of overproduction. To me, nothing makes sense unless this problem is settled. Many of these apologists for capitalism would be oh-so quick to point of the "failures" of communism/socialism: "It just doesn't work! History has proven! Etc., etc." yet when it comes to the question of capitalism being broken, these same voices say it is a problem in "types" or "kinds" of capitalism. This is laughable. A planned economy is the only sound economic model. The "problems" have been with the types or kinds of communism/socialism countries have explored.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Let go explorin' Posted by: edgar1
» Oh please Posted by: kegbot1
» RE: Oh please Posted by: richard0a37
» Let go explorin' Posted by: edgar1
RE: You call this capitalism?
Posted by: Evelyn on Jan 28, 2009 7:08 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In fact the fabled "truly free market" has never existed anywhere at any time. It is a castle in the air, promoted by libertarians as an ideal, but as unlikely to actually exist on this earth as pure communism or pure Christianity or any other platonic ideal.

If you want to see what a society without government intervention looks like, check out Somalia or the tribal regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Lovely, eh? In the absence of a strong and effective government, you get warlords. That is what real-world history shows. Get your head out of Ayn Rand and into reality.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

RE: You call this capitalism?
Posted by: wjfaust on Jan 28, 2009 7:34 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Interesting that you interpret Mr. Barber's vision as "a future where everybody serves everybody else and is happy". I don't think the economic principles he would like to see take hold imply that at all. No matter what label you assign to our current economy, the only things that matter are the facts that inequality is growing (social disaster) and planetary limits have been exceeded (environmental disaster). Whatever the next economy is called, it needs to address these crucial issues. Beyond that, it really doesn't matter who you serve.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Inequality is eternal. Posted by: kegbot1
You will serve no-one but yourself..
Posted by: donl51 on Jan 31, 2009 10:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
you should...I suggest a nice little place out in the middle of Alaska,when your house catchs fire ,don't count on anybody,when you need that cancer tumor removal,for 150-300k....use your own knife....you're 30...wow been around a real long time...learned little..I'm 64 ...twice your age and haven't seen it all,or been able to figure it out,and I'm very well educated!!their may not be a fix...maybe a lot of little fixes...its capitalism run amuck...the checks have been removed mostly by the moron who ran our country these last 8 years...eddie I read all your comments,we've both been on this site for sometime...this is by far your strangest....thats why I'll refrain from the wise ass remarks!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bravo
Posted by: wjfaust on Jan 28, 2009 7:12 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Very nice piece. If ever there was an opportunity to fashion an economy that "serves us", aborts consumerism and ends trickle-down BS, now is the time. It is encouraging to see so many articles seeking deep change in our economy. Whether Capitalism survives I don't know. As long as we wind up with an economy that honors our real needs and the planet's limits, that is all that really counts.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Bravo Posted by: greenPuker
et tu obame?
Posted by: edgar1 on Jan 28, 2009 7:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
people buy what they want (audis or SUVs) as well as what they need(food/protein). The US has succeeded like few other nations to allow its citizens that choice(and non-citizens since 1965!).

this is freedom. obama and his Ivy east eurpean mafia do not understand this, because they have never started a business nor tilled a farm, or made crafts with their own hands. they are the bastards of Big Finance and Capital. Print funny money. Weimar, run by the same sort, tried this scam. The people took appropriate retaliation, after misery caused by the fleecers.

All this article is about is that the govt should decide what we want and should need. This is an excuse for tyranny. Tyrants eventually come to a fitting end.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: You voted for tyranny. Posted by: kegbot1
» RE: et tu obame? Posted by: greenPuker
RE: UNDERGROUND ECONOMY
Posted by: HANGTRAITORS on Jan 28, 2009 9:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
LOL! AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA! i HAVE RESORTED TO PIMPING OUT MY DAUGHTER AND WIFE.. I SELL CRACK AND WEED .. MY SON IS A PRO SHOPLIFTER.. I ALMOST HAVE ENOUGH SAVED UP TO PAY FOR TREATMENT OF MY WIFES ANAL WARTS.. LOL!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

RE: This is satirical ....right?
Posted by: HANGTRAITORS on Jan 28, 2009 9:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
after re reading it .. i wondered if you were serious.. are you?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Good topic
Posted by: kegbot1 on Jan 28, 2009 8:10 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To me I see two things:

One, the defect that Soros sees inherent in the system is simple: the human factor. Any economic system without strict internal and external controls will eventually be overwhelmed by greed or megalomania. Capitalist societies based on free market principles are the easiest to co-op. As long as legislatures can be bought wholesale, we will never get to the point where the market, as envisioned by any school of economics, will serve the greatest part of the population. The busts will always destroy more lives than the booms help.

I favor a socialist approach because while it is also susceptible to human machinations (struggles for power and privilege in the system) to me, it is the system that provides the most necessary benefits (housing, food, health care, elder care, etc.) for the most people.

It is an open question whether any economic system run by humans won't eventually be co-opted by a powerful minority for their own benefit.

Second, Americans gravitate toward the malls and recreational and therapeutic shopping because, for many of them, it's the only time they feel happy and fulfilled - briefly.

Our particularly pernicious form of capitalism, by judging every single facet of life by what profit it can generate, has nearly destroy popular appreciation of culture (arts and letters) and human interaction and social cooperation (i.e. "Bowling Alone").

There was a time in America (seriously) where people from farmers to bankers listened to the New York Philharmonic together on the radio. Classical music and reading were not seen as 'elitist' activities.

In our life or death struggle for what is promised as 'the good life' we have been trained to see our friends and neighbors as 'competition' before we see them as fellow humans. Many, perhaps most people in our culture, choose mates for sex and marriage the same way we choose cars - what can this particular model do for my self-esteem and social standing? Can I afford this model?

In a society that encourages an 'every man for themselves' metality, we have gradually forgotten what it means to be fully human. We substitute that gaping loss in our souls with consumption. But the effects as rational people know, are fleeting.

Still, while I agree and commiserate with Barber, this will be like trying to turn around the Queen Mary in drydock. How do you undo decades long inculcation of get, spend and compete now buried so deep in the American psyche? Through an ad campaign? Think of the irony.

The problem is, the dog-eat-dog mentality has been so inured that any such suggestions for changes and sacrifices will be met by a 'ok - you first' mentality among many Americans. We're so afraid of being played for the sap (someone else will cheat and gain advantage so why should I cooperate?) that many of use cannot conceive of the masses acting in concert for the common good. The mentality for that is virtually non-existent.

Consider how many Americans believe that any talk of 'global warming' (actually global climate change) is a nefarious one world plot to separate them from their SUVs and gas grills. Their progeny will pay dearly for their paranoia and ignorance.

This mentality cannot be turned around quickly - it took almost two centuries (prior to de Tocqueville's observations) to get to where we are and it will take a concerted effort for many years to turn it around.

The problem, perhaps insoluble, is that we don't have all that time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Barber is afraid to take his own advice
Posted by: Chuck23 on Jan 28, 2009 8:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Barber raises some good points, but he's limited by the same paradigm he hopes to challenge. We do need to move away from consumerism, and this will be a positive change in society. Yet Barber still envisions a role for "capitalists." His reference to the "soul" of capitalism is ridiculous. Capitalism has no soul, and the shift that Barber wants is unattainable in a capitalist society. Capitalism, by its design, must always maximize profit, and so it will always resist putting its resources toward social benefit in place of maximum gain. "Capitalism" will work to purify water only to the extent that it is more profitable than selling privatized bottled water. Once the profit is extracted from the socially useful, capital will always abandon it to pursue a greater gain. So all of the positive social changes that Barber promotes will never be part of a capitalist system. Capitalism always seeks growth, and more growth, and will use all of its media access and control of the central institutions in America to ensure that the consumer mindset is not broken. I believe Barber is serious in his projections, but his mind is too limited by the belief that "capitalism" is the only way forward. Like so many others, he considers the "free market" akin to gravity, a natural force that will always be there. Unless we break that mindset, we'll remain "consumers" and little more. There is a role in the future for economic creativity and innovation, but if we keep "capitalism" as the driving force of our society, we will never make the progress that Barber promotes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The death of capitalism? It's not a matter of "if," it's a matter of "when."
Posted by: monkeywrench on Jan 28, 2009 8:32 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Capitalism, at least the "pure" capitalism of Laissez-Faire markets we have come to worship, depends for its very life on constantly-expanding supply (and profit) satisfying constantly-expanding demand. This system of constant expansion cannot continue infinitely in a finite system – and, the last time I looked, Earth, our little ball of rock and water floating in space, is about as finite as a system gets.

This fact alone ensures that capitalism as we know it is destined to die, and we are witnessing some of the illness that precedes that death in both our convulsing economy and the destruction of Earth's ecosystem. However, our inability to develop any other system to replace it also ensures that, before its inevitable death, it will go through prolonged, thrashing, death throes – but it will be all of us who suffer in pain.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

PARASITISM IS THE PLAN
Posted by: HANGTRAITORS on Jan 28, 2009 8:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Washington is elite owned corporate occupied territory.. All decisions are to benefit them .. never you.. the bankers who own/control this shit hole want debt debt debt debt. The USA in receivership is the ultimate agenda

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This brand of "Capitalism" is on it's knees!
Posted by: tarnishedreality on Jan 28, 2009 8:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What we term as "Capitalism" isn't the form of capitalism the Fathers of our country subscribed to. This is Fascist Capitalism a rabid form of socialized corporate capitalism. Big CEO's screw up then hold a gun to our leader's heads to bail them out. The incest going on between our Government and Corporate America is very 1930's Germany.

I point this out to my "Conservative" friends that say liberals like me want Socialism. Maybe some do, but for the most part I think most liberals really want to abolish this current incarnation of capitalism. It's the Government's charge to keep "Greed" in line. A free economy doesn't mean allowing Corporations to regulate themselves. People who care only about the bottom line and making money have a inherent conflict of interest when it comes to being regulators. It's also not our Government's burden to keep these folks in business. Because, our Government is doing just that is why we don't truly have a "Free Market". If it was a "Free Market" these companies would be free to fail.

I think all economic packages should be focused on helping people keeping their homes, updating the infrastructure of our country's roadways, bridges, parks, and public buildings. It would give the sector most effected by this downturn "The building industry" which is Engineers, Planners, Architects, Designers, Drafters, Administrative Assistants, Construction Workers and countless others jobs!!

Oh yes, we do need to cut our credit cards in half and stop buying a new couch and or car every year. Mindless consumerism put these folks in power to begin with.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Reclaiming Christianity From Those Who Stole It
Posted by: jimswanson on Jan 28, 2009 9:09 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mr. Barber, thanks for your inspirational wisdom.

America not only is waging a “fateful struggle for the soul of capitalism,”—as you ably put it—but there also is raging a battle for the soul of the Christian faith in America.

As a progressive Christian, I’m appalled at the Christian Reich’s upside-down version of Christ and Christianity—Pro-Rich and Pro-War.

Thanks to America’s Christian Reich, being “a Christian” has become a negative in the eyes of much of the world, and I can empathize with the increasing number of Americans—especially our youth—who have no use for Christianity.

As for me, I have chosen to stay and fight to reclaim my faith from those who use it to support rightwing economic policies and imperialism.

Christianity remains a powerful weapon in American politics, and we abandon this weapon to the extreme right at our peril.

This and much more is discussed in, "The Bush League of Nations: The Coalition of the Unwilling, the Bullied and the Bribed – the GOP’s War on Iraq and America," by James A. Swanson (2008, CreateSpace Publishing, 448 pages).

As a gift to patriots everywhere, the entire book can be downloaded for FREE at www.bushleagueofnations.com.

I ask for nothing in return, except that you consider using my book to help restore and build America.

Jim Swanson, Los Altos, CA
“The Bush League of Nations”
www.bushleagueofnations.com [for FREE download of entire book]

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I'm dismayed . . . Posted by: yesman
» RE: I'm dismayed . . . Posted by: greenPuker
Getting to the Source
Posted by: Liberty G on Jan 28, 2009 9:32 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm pleased to finally find someone talking about the fundamental flaws in our system. When most of the resources of a country are directed away from human needs and the good of its citizens, "stimulus" feeding the same broken distribution function isn't an answer.

I don't believe in enforced "public service", but I do think that:

1. We need a shift in values to more focus on joy in making the world a better place, rather than riches.

2. There is no "lack of jobs". Only work that is not funded because the money is not provided for that purpose - instead being gambled away by those trying to get even richer than they already are.

3. Therefore, we need to focus on reclaiming a significant part of the 90% of our resources now in the hands of a few, to redirect it to the work of meeting the needs of all Americans.
At least we should return to the tax structure which required significant payments from the wealthy, which sustained our prosperity in the past.

4. Funneling money through banks and large corporations involves huge waste, as they skim off a lion's share before putting any to work for the common good.(if they ever do the latter.

5. A better way of using "stimulus" money would be to put it directly to work - not just for infrastructure, but hiring teachers, paying health care providers (not insurance, but nurses, home health workers, etc.), paying SMALL businesses to do the environmental, energy and other jobs that would enhance our country and its people. Even rehiring government workers - yes, those guys - especially those performing services for the public and regulating fat cats.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Getting to the Source Posted by: edgar1
» RE: Cost Efficiency Posted by: Liberty G
Good article...
Posted by: Spiritgirl on Jan 28, 2009 9:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's not just the infantilizing but the dumbing down of Americans that has convinced us to "want" more! While the proposed economic stimulus is a good start, we as individuals, and as a society must wake up from the slumber of immediate gratification (aka consumerism) and start to re-value those "simple pleasures" that feed our spirit!

Though this fiasco happened on GWB's watch, this whole thing didn't start in a vacuum! Reagan and Clinton each played their respective part in selling the public onto believing the "free-market" theorists! The result is federal policy that not just rewards BIG BUSINESS over Jane the worker, but lauds the inheritance of big money over the person who does manage to save a few pennies!

While the Ruben-omics team continue to try and re-convince us that the slumber of consumerism is the way to go - the American people must not allow ourselves to become lulled back into that faux trap! We must lead our officials back into reality, the reality that consumer over-spending is not the answer that's needed for the growth of our nation, the reality that quality over quantity in life cannot be measured, the reality that most of the time less really is more!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Clinton? Thank you! Posted by: yesman
Huxley's consumerism?
Posted by: CalKid on Jan 28, 2009 9:53 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama is bringing a brave new world?

Advocating consumerism for obtaining a good economy is the stupidity of a planned economy gone awry.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

we want change without changing anything
Posted by: openeye on Jan 28, 2009 9:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is laughable, almost, hearing some of the proposals for "economic stimulus." They all seem to point in one direction: more buying. I personally am hoping for more thoughtfulness, more inability to foist off on a benumbed population - many of whom appear to shop for lack of any other purpose or satisfaction in their lives, mindlessly unaware of the dangers of television as the terrible tool of hypnotism that it can be, and is, for the most part. I personally will be happy if we have less & less cheaply made plastic items that clog up our dumps and do not decompose; fewer plastic toys that require batteries to dispose of - hey, where are all of these things landing anyway??? (lets face it, what would ultimately happen to a pile of discarded, possibly hand made, wooden toys, as opposed to the huge piles of discarded plastic toys you can find at any dump? think about that one for awhile!) less cheap (though expensive!) furniture made of laminates and lethal gas-producing chemicals...(ever watched or smelled a burning couch???) No, I personally welcome the challenge to re-think our actual financial crisis, because two things come to me off the top of my head: We are living in a virtual money reality, due to the CREDIT system. I mean come on - you have piles of stores out there advertising room-fulls of (usually quite cheap)furniture, with no payment required for 2 years! What is happening here?? The other issue I have is how in the heck are you going to "solve" the financial crisis by giving bankers more money to buy corporate jets and otherwise encouraging a policy of "spending as usual"?

No, for my money, the real issue here is this - and I quote from the article: 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.

To my way of thinking this would begin to address many of the issues troubling us today; we need to begin to be a nation of creative thinkers once more. (And that includes beginning to take a look at our entire political system as well!) After all, that is what made us a great nation in the first place. So while I generally approve of many of the things our new president is attempting, I think the "tried and true" efforts in the financial crisis area are not really penetrating the real core of the issue, and merely serve to maintain a status quo that must be allowed to die.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Radical change? LOL!!!
Posted by: tony12000 on Jan 28, 2009 10:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why would a Democrat do anything about changing things (not to mention "radically" changing thing), when Democrats were complicit in the policies that many progressives - yourself included - identify as causing the financial crisis in the first place? Your essay demands the impossible. Hold Them Accountable Part II: If Conservatives Caused the Economic Crisis, They Had a Lot of Help from Democrats!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Abbey summed it up...
Posted by: jlowelld on Jan 28, 2009 11:03 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Regarding capitalism, Edward Abbey summed it up by saying, "“Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell.”

To continue an economic system based on unlimited growth (within a finite system), or to take action to alter the economic system to a sustainable one, is a choice between to radically different outcomes: a sustainable system will allow the human species to continue; continued unlimited growth will guarantee extinction. To even address the possibility of creating a sustainable system will require immediate, unified and consternated action, and will require an end to the system of greed that is controlled by concentrated privately held capital interests--we can, as a species, no longer support an oligarchy. Whether or not the will or the mechanism exists to make such radical change--the next couple of years will tell...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Capitolism has been............
Posted by: ava1984 on Jan 28, 2009 11:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the scourge of mankind; the crimes committed in its name are legend.
If the USA is to survive and thrive in the future there must be changes in the way our trade and financial markets are run. A system that must trample on our fellow human beings here and around the globe is cancerous to its core.
The answer is Democratic Socialism; such a system, as in European democracies, which allows innovation without leaving everyone else in a ditch!
The repachoness of the business world has long ruled; though unseen, by most.
In today's world, where remote villages have access to cell phones, our deeds are no longer hidden and we are exposed as ravenous wolves; slave holders, whether we like it or not!
To really change will take courage and time; always remembering that life is finite. So, there is no time to lose!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» True Posted by: yesman
Identity Crisis
Posted by: Gregsdiary on Jan 28, 2009 11:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"...a silent but fateful struggle for the soul of capitalism is being waged."

Barber's premise for his argument is that we live in a capitalism--not a democracy or even a republic.

Why doesn't that seem to bother anyone posting here?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

corporate welfare
Posted by: Bliss Doubt on Jan 28, 2009 1:08 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
reinforces bad capitalism, and prevents the honest, diverse, upright businesses from rising up to compete with the crippled giants such as the banksters, the auto makers, the box stores, agri-biz, pharma. I think I still believe in capitalism, as long as it is regulated against corruption, fraud and government by lobbyists, and as long as the labor end of the equation is as valued as the ownership end of it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Adam Smith Capitalism
Posted by: adam21 on Jan 28, 2009 2:10 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Although Smith is considered 'the father of modern capitalism,' most modern U.S. economists pick and choose only what they like from what he has written. They reject and twist all the rest of his writings about society, and even much of that in THE WEALTH OF NATIONS.

ONE: Smith was basically a 'moral philosopher.' This is what he studied and taught in Universties, and wrote about. He considered his first book THE THEORY OF MORAL SENTIMENTS (1759) to be his greatest work (much superior to all others) which provided the ethical, philosophical, psychological, and methodological 'underpinnings' of all his later works, including THE WEALTH OF NATIONS (1776). Morality (sympathy for others) was an 'invisable hand' that guided all social relationships for the benefit of society.

TWO: In TWON he said that the 'invisable hand' functioned in the 'political economy' through a free market system, basically through a
LABOR THEORY OF VALUE, in which labor is the cause of a nation's wealth, NOT the actual accumulation of wealth (gold and silver and other material goods), which is rejected in U.S. capitalistic theory.

THREE: He was totally opposed to slavery, colonialism, empire and monopolies. He was 'skeptical' of government involvement in the free market system, but actually approved and proposed it when it would benefit the nation, and preserve the labor theory of value for all citizens, which of course is absent in systems of slavery, colonialism, empire, and monopoly.

If Smith were alive today, he probably would approve of European socialistic capitalism, with more sympathy for ALL classes of labor
(including owners and managers) wherein the true wealth of nations resides. Contrarywise, he would likely see all the disdain for all workers EXCEPT owners and managers in the U.S., and the great concentration of wealth measured in the accumulation of gold, silver, and other 'goods' of value. Workers are the 'enemies' of U.S. capitalism as it functions today.

He might label our system as 'Self-Interest Capitalism to the Extreme,' or 'Greedy Capitalism for the Few.' And so it is!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Adam Smith Capitalism Posted by: donl51
O.K. I'm not an Ecomomy Expert, BUT
Posted by: madmax427 on Jan 28, 2009 2:24 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
how can anything come of this when oppression & suppression are STILL allowed to run rampant?!

I started a website because My Father was turned into an Incomplete Quadrapeleigc during an accident on a Union Pacific Railroad Crossing. My Attempt was to recieve some JUSTICE for My Father, who suffered for over a year & a half before dying. Thru all of My efforts I have had to fight just to keep the website up! I tried expanding it to include Governmental Change because I kept seeing the cancer grow (from beyond Union Pacific to the Federal Railroad Adminstration who SUPPORTED the Railroad instead of insuring the Railroad maintained Safety!) I JUST learned My e-mails I have been TRYING to send, requesting support/help were NEVER recieved! It is a FACT the NSA is 'wire tapping' American Citizens! I KNOW they have done MUCH MORE to Me than 'wire tapping'!!

I have been doing My website for well over four years now (www.whatsyourlifeworth2.info) This month alone, I have four times more 404 errors than I do Visitors! I have not had a Visitor sign My Guestbook in MONTHS! Mass Mailouts show better results than My Stats do!
I put My name and address on My site requesting donations, then JUST send Me a Letter so I KNOW You saw it! I have NEVER had a reply of ANY KIND! Can ANYONE believe NO ONE felt enough of My pain to just send a NOTE to Me?! I know this Nation has become overwhelmed with Selfishness, but let's be realistic, it ain't THAT bad is it?!

I NEED Your HELP to get the NSA off My back!

PLEASE!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A Greek tragicomedy
Posted by: chlamor on Jan 28, 2009 2:49 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is one irony on top of another.

I don't believe Paulson and company set out to steal on TARP. I think they woke up one morning and the credit markets were in free-fall and it was time to become instant Keynesians. Put out $2 trillion in Federal Reserve cash, allocate $700 billion for TARP and they're off to the races. Of course, idiot Dems and Republicans start whining, the banks blow the dog whistle and before you know it, not a single dollar goes out for "toxic assets" or mortgage relief and it all goes to the banks, who wait a week to see if they are alive and the ones that are immediately go back to stealing.

"Highway robbery", cries the Congress... and everything shifts to Barack Delano Obama. Meanwhile, the Democratic plan is "Stimulus". It is the cheer of the day: S-T-I-M-U-L-U-S. But the basis of that stimulus can't be government jobs ala FDR. That would be too "slow"... and too "old school". So, instead of government jobs there will be government spending for the private sector - infrastructure (I-N-F-R-A-S-T-R-U-C-T-U-R-E). But, even here, not just any infrastructure but only the projects that are ready to go - "shovel ready" (S-H-O-V-E-L). "That'll work", cry even the "left" Nobels (Stiglitz and Krugman). Perhaps $500 billion of infrastructure spending, each year for two years... why that'll create maybe 2 million jobs. Of course, that is less than what was lost in 2008 alone and it ain't exactly "efficient", but it's "fast", so... for the first time... it's gonna be: "damn the efficiency and full speed ahead". Maybe they can toss another $250 to $500 billion to leverage the States and get them to take on debt and make a few jobs... and, and...

And then the Obama political train pulls into town. "Stimulus", yes, but bipartisanship too... and don't forget the "middle-class tax cuts" and we want 80% of congress to vote for it and, and...

So, now they go to work... and the Tax cuts are a "middle-class tax cut" which amounts to virtually the exact same amount as Bush's "stimulus check" ($187 billion versus $152 billion), and a $100 billion corporate tax cut which won't have any effect at all, and a few hundred billion to the states, but not as "leverage" so much as to make up for state deficits, and a zillion projects of which half are much needed relief (but you can't call them "relief" cause that's bad so we call them "stimulus" too), and the other half are not stimulus or relief or "fast", but instead are somebody's bacon. And, by the time we get to "infrastructure", we are really talkin' about only $90 billion. But, magically, this $90 billion (a fifth of what was originally proposed) will NOW create 3 million jobs. And... they know they are lying so they change the words around to read "create or sustain" 3 million jobs... and the whole thing is a disaster with everybody callin' everything, "stimulus".

And so now, we have proven that everybody knows exactly, positively what to do and not one of them can do it... so it is up to the fates, the stars, and Greek muses to decide if the economy will recover all on its own or whether there is another huge step downwards, and either way there will be tens of millions (perhaps hundreds) on the edge of survival and not a few will fall off that edge...

And meantime, they could just hire 10 million people tomorrow... deciding later what they would do... and at $70,000 a year, that would only have been $700 billion. But, then everyone would quit their real jobs to take the new phoney-balony ones because they paid a lot more... and then you would have to create more phony jobs and how could you do that without actually producing stuff and then that would compete with the private sector and pretty soon you would end up without one, so...

Better to leave things just as they are.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

tough times
Posted by: cbishopp on Jan 28, 2009 2:50 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The financial crisis has forced me to see the err of my ways. I will not buy a plasma TV this year, instead I will go to the park or ride a bike.
Is that what this is all about middle America? Cutting back on basic extras that we did not need in the first place? Reducing the production of technologies harmful the environment because we can't afford it right now?
Jesus.
I appreciate being hopeful but tell that to someone whose disability just dropped by $25,000 this year. Is THAT person glad to be in this crisis and excited about the prospect of having less?
I voted for Obama and I am a supporter but all these holier than though, tough times ahead, I'll still be ok and I am a good person for noticing the impoverished is making me a little sick to my stomach.
We should not be concerned about the people in the middle who may drop down a little but the people on the bottom who are getting crushed. Where do you think the people in the middle are headed?
Revamping the system without a complete change in monetary policy is a waste of time.
The Fed must be abolished. A regulating body is fine if not necessary but paying interest on money that the Fed creates from nothing is crazy.
Canada just bailed out their banks as well in much the same way. Borrow at interest, give it to banks for free, hope they lend it back AT INTEREST. This is circular and we will lose.
The debt will not go away by cutting back on monthly expenses and printing more money. Rising medical costs will not be alleviated by tax credits while we still have employers control how the bulk of health care dollars are spent.
The issue is not just that people are trained from a young age to buy crap in this country but that they have to pay a middle man for every transaction.
Deficit spending only works when it alleviates debt not by quadrupling the principle in a span of four months.
As long as the system functions just as it has for the last century we will never be free of this debt. You will continue to put in longer hours for a less stable dollar, for rising food costs, for a lowered expectation of the quality of your life.
If Bush were still President there would be riots in the street right now.
Obama will lead us through the depression but he is powerless to correct it. All he can do is stick his fingers in the dam and hope for the best.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: tough times Posted by: richard0a37
Crisis or opportunity?
Posted by: yesman on Jan 28, 2009 3:04 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As is usually the case, this crisis can also be an opportunity. However, we do not have time or resources to waste trying to revive the former "consumer economy" (a contradiction in terms, no?). That way of life has gone the way of the dinosaur, and the sooner we come to terms with that fact, the better off we'll be. Our economy must be rebuilt, but what it will look like is still open to question. We should try to rebuild the economy that we want. We should take this opportunity to ask ourselves what kind of society we want to live in, and try to create it for ourselves. However, we must immeidately stop listening to those who want to try to revivify a dead past. They may have made a living by scamming the rest of us in the past, but they're in the same boat with the rest of us now. The former number jugglers are going to have to learn how to actually earn their keep, just like the rest of us (their current and former victims) have always had to do.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

When will the capitalists ever learn?
Posted by: holypigeon on Jan 28, 2009 4:41 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While I agree that the public needs to change its habits and its wasteful consumption, I'm tired of hearing this notion that change is soley our responsibility and challenge now. Especially after we've been screwed. The fact is that nothing is going to change until the capitalistic powers that be are overturned. The financiers who created this economic crisis are profitting from it, not learning from it. They have taken our money, have done nothing of value with it, and are not being held accountable. If the public does anything at all, it should be to dismantle this oppressive system.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What's wrong with profit?
Posted by: Sum Won on Jan 28, 2009 4:58 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why is making weapons of mass destruction a profitable endeavour while the health and welfare of citizens requires subsidies?

Shouldn't it be reversed?

Why is bottling tap water a profitable endeavour while insuring that everyone has a tap isn't?

Who decides what is profitable and what is subsidized?

The profit motive of capitalism could be far more efficient than charity (subsidies) as to fulfilling the needs of the human race. Why can't the currently underutilized entrepreneurial zeal of America be put to productive use?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What's wrong with profit? Posted by: richard0a37
» RE: What's wrong with profit? Posted by: Bliss Doubt
"Sustainable" Capitalism
Posted by: pdxjoe on Jan 28, 2009 5:22 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Capitalism, no matter the liberal-progressive bells and whistles you attach to it, is fundamentally a social system of private-property. Such a system cannot function without constantly expanding, for as soon as it reaches homeostasis (i.e. people getting what they need out of it and putting no more in than is necessary to get what they need) it collapses or, as has been the case for the last thirty some-odd years, stagnates. We already see how late capitalism has tried to cope with this stagnation, first with the rise of the credit industry, to the more recent "experience economy" that does not try to sell people material stuff but an intangible experience that is nonetheless essentially a commodity in its form. More dangerously though, we have seen the patenting and privatizing of the most essential "commons," from medical procedures to DNA itself.

This is why the idea of a "capitalism with a human face" that encourages decreased consumption, truly decreased consumption and not merely compensated consumption, as is the thrust of many so-called green solutions, is a farce. For those deeply invested on a personal level in the capitalist fantasy of everyone putting in an honest day's work and getting a "fair" wage out of it, to speak of decreasing sales is to speak of suicide. I would get fired on the spot if I suggested to my employer that there was something more important I could do for the customer rather than ensure that they will consume (sooner or later) from our business. This capitalism-without-capitalism, this diet capitalism, that the author speaks of is about as sustainable as nutri-sweet is nutritious.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Ambitious Ignorance Posted by: Gregsdiary
» RE: "Sustainable" Capitalism Posted by: richard0a37
What am I doing to stimulate the economy?
Posted by: AJR Journal on Jan 28, 2009 5:31 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To help my country I have:
1) Bought a Dyson DC25 vacuum cleaner from Kohls.com. Price $450.
2) Bought a pair of Allen-Edmonds shoes (Hampstead design). Price $250.
3) Bought a Dirt-Devil upright vacuum cleaner from Menards. Price $50.
4) Bought 4 pair of Nagrani OTC dress socks. Price $130.
5) Bought 2 made-to-measure suits and 6 tailored shirts (with french cuffs). Price $1200.
I want to be a good American and do my part.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» TRAITOR!! Posted by: gellero1
My Friend Father Bernard From Clitheroe Sent Me a Really Nice Letter and Enclosed WITNESS MAP
Posted by: tony_opmoc on Jan 28, 2009 6:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Medical Aid For Palestinians

Tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» www.map-uk.org Posted by: tony_opmoc
EVERY FREAKING THING ABOUT THIS IS BAD, HORRIFIC DISASATER!!!
Posted by: stopthemaddness2 on Jan 28, 2009 6:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is absolutely NOTHING GOOD ABOUT THIS!!! NOTHING!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

AMERICA HAS BECOME AN UPSCALE THIRD WORLD NATION ....OVERNIGHT, THE ECONOMY IS A NIGHTMARE
Posted by: stopthemaddness2 on Jan 28, 2009 6:18 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What in the world is good about an economic Armageddon? NOT ONE DAMN THING!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Identity and Ambition
Posted by: Gregsdiary on Jan 28, 2009 9:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This same article by Barber was posted the other day at commondreams. It's interesting to see what appears to me to be a fundamental difference in response to the article at each site.

I've been reading both Alternet and CD for a year now and think both are excellent in news and reader comments.

But of course, there's a difference in approach between the two and the response from this article I think clearly illustrates it.

Simply put, CD seems less in line with the Democratic Party thought and conventional wisdom and more in line with social issues.

Alternet seems more in line with the politics behind those issues--specifically as they relate to and reflect on Democratic strategies.

This is just a general impression I have and certainly not any kind of hard and true rule.

But I thought it was interesting--especially with respect to this article. That is, as I read it, it's an article that plays a 'social justice' approach yet is essentially market-minded more than anything else.

So the comments to it here and my impression of both sites seems to coincide.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Rotten to the core
Posted by: willymack on Jan 28, 2009 9:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Our guv, our economy, our religious institutions, and our people are ALL rotten to the core. They've all gotta go, except the people, of course.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: otten to the core Posted by: richard0a37
Consumers Rule
Posted by: gellero1 on Jan 28, 2009 10:54 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
why shouldn't the common man have a high pressure washer, a label maker, a veg-a-matic, and an ExtenZ pill for that 'special part of a man's body' i see on late nite cable TV??

I want an android phone too. My beepers gotta go. and why would anyone subscribe to Sirius Radio when we get such good stuff free over the air.

And although I'm against body mutilation and tattoos.....I do like my latest babe's fake boobs........gives me a lot of status in the club scene here in Florida and Aspen.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Consumers Rule Posted by: richard0a37
Consumers Rule
Posted by: gellero1 on Jan 28, 2009 11:03 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One man's wastefull consumption is another man's production.

If we in the West want to elevate the illiterate masses of the 'Turd World'...do them a favor and CONSUME the stuff they produce.

They have a human right to move beyond plowing fields with oxen.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Living in a dream world......
Posted by: richard0a37 on Jan 29, 2009 1:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This week, Davos in Switzerland is hosting a big get together of 2,000 of the best and the brightest, with an opening speech by Putin telling us that this current financial crisis is the worst for 80 years.

I have just returned from my 2nd trip to Ghana in Africa.

Imagine a cesspit, a huge great cesspit stretching for miles as far as the eye can see, or better still, imagine you are living in Baghdad just after Bush and Co had devastated the region with their shock and awe tactics destroying the infrastructure, and everywhere you look is misery and poverty. Or perhaps you can imagine New Orleans after Katrina struck.

Anyway, you move in, and amidst all the poverty and misery, you construct a nice little piece of heaven which insulates you from the rest of the world, and which allows you to enjoy all the luxuries of life without having to be bothered by all the poverty and misery that you are surrounded by.

This is planet earth.

Now I like Obama, I have sort of fallen in love with the guy (not in the gay sense you understand), it's just that he comes across as a truly beautiful human being, and of course he holds the most powerful position on earth.

I landed at Gatwick airport Monday morning. We in the civilised world do not know how LUCKY we are to live in such affluence and luxury.

Some of the little kids in Ghana have to walk 2 hours before getting to school.

Most of the roads outside the centre of Accra don't even have names, and there are NO ROAD SIGNS apart from the odd one or two.

Mile after mile after mile, there is nothing but market stalls and street traders with baskets on their heads selling the cheapest crap imaginable, because THEY HAVE NO CHOICE.

To Obama and the rest of them in Davos, Switzerland, I say this.

Go and spend a week in Ghana. Discover what institutionalised poverty is.

I don't know what makes a country civilised. But back in 1947 just after the 2nd world war ended, the local Authority built an estate of several hundred prefabricated houses with pavements, good roads, street lights, street names, a bus service, a post office, a parade of shops, electricity, sewers, fresh water, coal delivery for heating, and schools.

These prefabs were fully fitted with cooker, hand washing machine, fridge, sink, taps and fresh water, 2 bedrooms, a living room, kitchen and bathroom and toilet. Outside, a coal shed. They were all built on what was once a field, and all the tenants were victims of the 2nd world war who came from the east end of London and needed to be rehoused.

Me and my parents moved into one of these houses when I'd just turned 1 year old. Some of the other residents were so poor, they had hardly any furniture in the living rooms, and some weekends, my mother would lend a neighbour 5/- so she could buy food for her family.

A year later, the NHS came into being. Free health, free education.

I have a degree in physics, am a software engineer by profession, I represented Gt Britain in world university judo in 1968, I play the guitar and piano, I have written many essays that are technically and philosophically challenging. I have written the screen play for a full length feature movie that reveals the next great evolutionary leap for Mankind.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Evolution, where are you?
Posted by: richard0a37 on Jan 29, 2009 1:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Did you know, it's impossible for 4 legged female animals to get raped. Think about it - the male must mount the female from behind. If she doesn't want to mate, she just walks away, and the male lands flat on his face.

The male 4-legged animal requires the absolute co-operation of the female when mating. He can't do it without her total support, and she must remain stationary.

Female animals can control population of their species, of their herd. In herds, the female can gauge if more little animals are needed and mate accordingly. The 4-legged female animal is in control of population of the species.

Also, the young can remain in physical contact with their mother even when she is mating, because the male is physically removed from them. Thus, the symbiosis between mother and child is never compromised.

Not so with the human. Man must lie on the woman and so she is trapped. Further, he can pin her to the wall with his arms. So woman can be raped against her will.

Children can no longer remain in contact with their mother while she is mating. They have to be confined to another room, for sex is always conducted in private.

It's good for the father, not so for the children. If children happen to see their parents making love, what would they see? Father on top of mother. She's groaning, they think he's trying to kill their mother and they get frightened and will run away.

Population control is out of the hands of the female human.

Anyway, God is discussing this with the other Gods, and they conclude that the ills of the human race are all sex related, and that making sex pleasurable was a big mistake.

'This time, we're going to do it different and solve all the problems,' says one to the other as they plan the destruction of the entire human race, and its replacement with something else.

'How are you going to do that?' says one.

'This time, we are going to reverse the position of the man's penis and his bottom'

'This will solve all the problems. This time, the woman will have stand behind the man when they are mating. And because a woman tends to be shorter, she will have to stand on a box, and this means the man will have to stay still while she bounces up and down.

The woman will once again be in control of the sex.

Not only that, the man will have his hands free to read the newspaper or do the crossword. And if the children come into the room, they will see their mother standing behind their father, and will not get frightened.

Plus, the man will be free to kick the children out of the room.

'That is true,' says one of the other Gods. 'But if they come in the room, they will see their father's bottom.'

'You're right,' says Number 1 God. 'It's just a pile of shit really.'

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Changing the face of life on earth.
Posted by: richard0a37 on Jan 29, 2009 2:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In Ghana, if you have a heart, you want to give money to everyone you see.

But what happens the next day when you go back home?

As I said above, I don't know what makes a country civilised. Standing outside the Departures building of Accra airport in the warm, sultry, evening air, you can see lots of people standing idly about, either waiting for a plane or for people to arrive.

And I say to myself, why don't the Authorities build some really nice restaurants and cafes, they would have plenty of customers.

Gatwick is full of shops, restaurants, cafes, places to sit and enjoy yourself. Gatwick has lovely roads and pavements, well sign posted.

But why UK and USA and all the other civilised countries, and not Ghana and the rest of the 3rd world? What is the essential difference between our way of life and theirs?

Is it the hot climate? No, because Florida and California are just as hot.

It's taken 60 years for England to become one of the most desirable places to live in. There is virtually no poverty to speak of. Our infrastructure is 2nd to none, in every single respect.

By why? Free health, free education, good roads, good clean living.

In this country, capitalism started in earnest when Thatcher came to power in 1979, and marks the date when the work ethic became number 1 priority. Work is what got us out of the doldrums of the 60s and 70s.

Thatcherism is possibly responsible for our current fantastic standard of living in the UK.

And our standard of living here is truly fantastic if you compare our lives with the Ghanians who basically have nothing.

So again, I say to the powers-that-be go spend a week in Ghana. It is such a beautiful country with beautiful people, and with the Internet and Sky TV (unlike in the 60s), they can see at a glance what life in our part of the world is like.

Approximately 1 billion years ago, a single celled microscopic entity appeared on this planet that just happened to be resilient enough to adapt to every single life form that now inhabits the planet.

The tree of life has branches containing every single living organism that has existed on this planet, including Man.

THERE IS NO GOD.

This painful fact cannot be accepted by most people, but the evidence is now overwhelming that life evolved on this planet purely as a consequence of the chemical and physical interaction of strands of DNA with its environment.

All of our unique characteristics - abstract thought, intelligence, language etc, all these can be all be deduced as consequential to the great dilemma faced by mankind when he first learnt to stand comfortably on two legs and was able to make love facing each other, when s/he then discovered it would change forever the way mothers relate to their babies.

EVOLUTION? NO! I T'U LOVE.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Will we find resilience?
Posted by: the fairness fella on Jan 29, 2009 2:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I just left this comment on the companion article about hard times and suicide. It also fits here, I think.

I spent the last two years helping Olive Riley with her blog, that of the oldest blogger in the world. Olive died six months ago at 108.

In some of the early posts we talked of the great depression she lived through.

Though the times were very hard, Olive remembered them as not unhappy times. People were closer to basics then and so when they lost jobs, it was not such a big step to turn the garden into a veggie patch, to start making their own clothes, and hunting their own meat, mostly rabbits.


Cars did not drain the family purse of 20% because people rode bikes, and were healthier and happier for it.

People helped each other lot too, providing free accomodation for relatives or neighbors, lending a bike, sharing a job.

Who's able or inclined to do any of this today?

There were many evictions of course and groups of neighbors who sometimes stopped those evictions.

There was a politician, who became a God, Jack Lang, who stopped the evictions legislatively.

Many landlords and banks, on their own bat, decided that it was better to leave people in their homes, knowing the properties would be protected rather than having them empty and vandalized.

A surprising number of people paid back every cent they owed when the depression was over.

I wonder if it's not time for those who are worried, who can see trouble ahead, to not only think big thoughts as the article suggests, but to check out books on the Great Depression, and see how they did it back then.

Olive and I, here in Australia, discussed David Potts book, The Myth of the Great Depression. By myth, David meant that it was not all doom and gloom, and for this rather rosy view, he got flack from some reviewers. But Olive found him spot on.

Olive's blog is still up. www.allaboutolive.com.au. Go to the archive for July 2007. At the very least, this feisty old lady will cheer you up with news of the simple life.

We chortled over the fact that, in line with keeping your own hen house, etc. One depression battler coined the phrase, making hens meet.

Cuba too, is a model. When the Russians cut Cuba's oil off in the early nineties, the Cubans had to re invent their economy and the cities became full of market gardens.

There are films about this, showing great resilience and cheerfulness on the part of the Cubans.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »]

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

nuance?
Posted by: healthyhomefronts@comcast.net on Jan 29, 2009 3:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Unless they live on a self-sufficient commune, Americans need to buy things. Since 99.9% of Americans need to buy things, wouldn't it be more helpful to discuss mindless vs. mindful consumerism? Some of us have young children and meaningful and purposeful careers. We don't have all day and night to make our own clothes, bake our own bread, and grow all of our own produce. I see nothing wrong with buying a bouquet of flowers, and nothing disturbing about the fact that I love having fresh flowers in the house.

I agree that we can live with much less, and one healthy way to do that is to appreciate and cherish the things we have. People make art and music and fine furniture because we have an aesthetic sense. On a bleak, cold, and rainly day, I like bringing out a pretty teacup. Is there a place for me in your worldview?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: nuance? Posted by: richard0a37
» RE: nuance? Posted by: healthyhomefronts@comcast.net
» RE: nuance? Posted by: richard0a37
» RE: nuance? Posted by: richard0a37
I don't want Obama and the extreme Alternet left reimagining my lifestyle
Posted by: bob12386 on Jan 29, 2009 4:56 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Keep your filthy hands off. Thanks.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Boy are you deluded! Posted by: zipoka
In this self-righteous extreme individualist mentality nation of ours,
Posted by: jwverez on Jan 29, 2009 7:52 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
articles like these receive overkill hair-trigger responses. I can see that people, especially the rightwing assholes, on this forum are not ready to give up their "greed is good" mentality although I could technically say the same of the author.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

21st century of global consciousness
Posted by: maxsmart on Jan 29, 2009 11:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes need to get beyond the American Sweat Dream of getting rich at the expense of everyone else or just working to death to get ahead in life.

We also need to get beyond the idea of individual freedom.

We are all interdependent on a global scale and the whole depends on all of the parts being in balance and not one part dominating another for it's own advantage but at the same time the parts and indiviuals have to be free from too much domination that the have no room to move, spread their wings, and fly.

We need an economics that is based on interdependence and global sustainability rather than simply expansion and growth. That looks at long term development more than short term profit.

We need to realize that vast disparity of poor and rich is not conducive to general quality of life and the Bhutanese idea of Gross Domestic Happiness.

We need to limit the amount of excess hierarchical structure we have being wasted on advertising, lawyers, credit card company percentages extracted from every transaction as well as the loan sharking of the poor.

We also need to examine just how much misplaced faith we put in mitilary and defense spending and the deveopment of the the next gen of weapons that will soon after be aimed back at us. That war is a false profit.

In general we have to look at just how much high paying priesthoods of organized civilization be can supported on top of the work of food, housing, clothing, health, social governance and organization, education, defense, transportation, marketing, and entertainment.

We also need to examine just much the moral police create problems of excessive limitation of basic needs and instincts that drive eruptions of war and collective psychosis as tension relief valves that sanction hatred, destruction, torture, and inhumanity aimed at some demonized group, country, ethnic, sexual stereotype or religious group.

We have to learn how to live on this tiny jewel of life called Earth, warmed and powered by our only begotten Sun, and polish it with our love of life into a diamond that gleams and that allows our human nature to not be repressed but is organized so the whole can be nurtured rather than separate national units striving for strategic dominance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Jarhead
Posted by: Jarhead on Jan 29, 2009 12:19 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If Democrats are serious about the economy and the environment, how about this for a stimulus package: Give every homeowner a voucher worth about $10-20,000 that can only be used to install solar panels or wind turbines on the property. This would put millions of people to work, lower our dependence on foreign oil, reduce carbon emissions and stimulate research and development into renewable energy sources. It would also allow families to save big on energy costs, and use that money to pay off debt and make purchases to stimulate the economies of local communities.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What is specific about Fascism?
Posted by: RR#1 on Jan 29, 2009 10:07 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Fascism is a product of a severe systemic crisis of monopoly capitalism ( imperialism)in which the normal valorization of capital under conditions of bourgeois parliamentary democracy is being increasingly undermined. Parallel to this crisis in the economy and in the political institutions, their is a radicalizing discontent among the petty bourgeoisie, and their growing organization in new forms of mass organizations. These operate initially in an autonomous way, but are then used to an increasing extent by big business in its attempt to destroy the organized labour movement and to atomize the working class...Fascism is in the last instance, a mass movement of the petty bourgeosie gone wild. In this mass movement we find a combination of extreme nationalism and at least a verbal anti-capitalist demagogy with an even greater hostility towards the organized labour movement....When this developing mass movement begins to use physical violence against the workers, the workers' actions and their mass organization, then we have the beginning of a fascist party. Ernest Mandell in Trotsky as Alternative

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Personality and Class-Liberalism and Marxism-are evil
Posted by: RR#1 on Jan 29, 2009 11:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The nation-is good. But at the threshold of private property this philosophy is is turned inside out. Salvation lies only in personal private property. The idea of national property is Bolshevism. Deifying the Nation, the petty bourgeosie doesn't want to give it anything. On the contrary, he expects the nation to endow him with property and to safeguard him from the worker and the baliff...
Ernest Mandell, Trotsky as Alternative.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Welfare state?
Posted by: zipoka on Feb 2, 2009 12:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What planet do you live on? Corporate welfare state maybe, with private gains and socialized losses. Defense welfare state maybe, where you can lose billions of dollars without having to explain.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

OBAMA: THE DIM BULB
Posted by: reelman on Feb 3, 2009 11:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How can a man allow so many nominees with so much baggage to NOT be vetted properly?

Now for some Late Night jokes about how smart Obama and his staff of socialist thugs are, can't wait.

***Charlie Rangel, Timothy Geithner, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and most recently Tom Daschle are just a few in a long line of DEMOCRAT politicians who can’t seem to figure out how to pay taxes. Everyone needs to play by the same rules, but that’s just not happening.***

PERMIT ME TO SHOW YOU THE “OTHER” SET OF LAWS…THOSE FOR DEMOCRATS…suckers…

(democrats love taxes, just love them…but they don’t like to pay them…how ya like that irony? Plus democrats always call Repubs dumb...so how dumb is all this?)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement