In a letter about a month ago [November 1968, Winnipeg], I suggested to an American
friend that the political-economic system of Capitalism had many undesirable effects, and that it is understandable
why so many are fleeing from freedom [to Canada during the Vietnam War]. They
could not support the U.S. government--even with a military desk job, aware
that the U.S. is engaged in a subtle form of world conquest by means of economic exploitation through expansion of its corporate
system. This certainly is better than the old form of military conquest which
required the stationing of permanent troops. In this light it makes sense why
the U.S. opposes socialization of industry. But rather than wander off into
the entanglements of interpreting history, I would like to briefly point out what I feel is wrong with capitalism; my American
friend lacked the imagination to think of something better than capitalism. I
will, therefore, as I did in my reply to his letter, describe four consequences of capitalism that are objectionable. I am not trying to argue for a point, but rather to raise question, which I hope the
reader will give fair consideration. At times I will both raise questions
and suggest answers.
(A) THE VIRTUE OF SELFISHNESS
One of the fundamental faults of capitalism is the basic axiom that if everybody tries to accumulate
as much property as possible the general interest of the people will be served. All
this seems to create is exploitation. The factory owners try to reduce as much
as possible their expenditures on employees. The factory and storeowners try
to profiteer as much as possible without any concern for the public. It has often
been said that such a piggish axiom is needed to motivate people. But there are
other motivations besides greed, such as, travel, interesting work, extra vacation time, shorter hours, a feeling of importance,
and the feeling of happiness which comes from doing a good job and helping build a better community. To support the wage-incentive axiom is the myth that luxuries brings happiness. Are we that much on an island that we have no compassion for our fellow man, for there are only so many
loaves of bread in our country? I think a system which is based on an assumption
that man is basically piggish and therefore only fit to look after his own needs; such system impedes rather than promotes
the good within each person.
(A) THE VIRTUE OF SELFISHNESS
One of the fundamental faults of capitalism is the basic axiom that “if everybody tries
to accumulate as much property as possible the general interest of the people will be served.” All this seems to create is exploitation. Hughie Newton said,
“Show me a capitalist, and I’ll show you a pig.” The factory
owners try to reduce as much as possible their expenditures on employees. The
factory and storeowners try to profiteer as much as possible without any concern for the public. It has often been said that such a piggish axiom is needed to motivate people. But it is not the workers that grow fat from owning the means of production and the means of distribution. There are other motivations besides greed, such as, travel, interesting work, extra
vacation time, shorter hours, a feeling of importance, and the feeling of happiness which comes from doing a good job
and helping build a better community. And these rewards can be applied to the
work and those who supervise the means of production and distribution. Reasonable
rewards for those who direct manufacturing and distribution ought to be set at no more than 10 fold that of the common laborer.
Are we that much on an island that we have no compassion for our fellow man,
for there are only so many loaves of bread in our country? I think a system which
is based on an assumption that man is basically piggish and therefore only fit to look after his own needs, such system impedes
rather than promotes the good within each person.
(B) THE IMPORTANCE OF ECONOMIC SUCCESS
I
have felt there is more to justice than the impartial enforcement of laws. Is
there not a Christian sense of justice, where it is wrong to take advantage of other people?
This sense of fairness comes into conflict with the business ethic, which considers as right all forms of profiteering
and exploitation as long as it is within the law. Through the millions spent
in lobbing reasonable controls upon business have been removed. The desire for
economic success and the influence of the powerful elite have ruined the mass media.
The restrictions advertisers de facto place upon content has limited critical political and economic ideas while presenting
subtle approval of our economic system. The mass media is becoming more and more
an opiate, an aid for living the unexamined life. There is a lack of diversity
of opinion. The schools could do much better by teaching critical analysis. Why is it that philosophy and ethics, economics, and political theory are not taught
as exercises in critical thought in our public schools? And what about media
content? Who would be challenged—besides the churches—by a populace
that a developed ability to critically analyze complex issues? With such a populace
there would be many fundamental changes and social justice would become its first axiom.
(C) THE RELATION
OF WAR TO MARKETS {written during the Vietnam War}
The major factor in every war has been the protection or expansion of markets. For one thing, our workers gain very little through the conquest of a foreign country; it is the powerful
and wealthy who will gain. The War of 1848 was one of expansion, the Civil War
protected huge northern investments in the South, and the First and Second World Wars prevented the establishment of Continental
Europe as a German sphere of influence. The War of 1812 was fought for the protection
of trading rights. Why is the United States so upset over Cuba? The U.S. founding fathers have been called “founding fathers” because they gained the most
by the establishment of a new government. And why would Japan or Germany, for
example, try to gain control of other countries? The current world tensions are
a result of a struggle for spheres of influence and trade—the socialist markets are essential not open to trade from
capitalist countries. We are opposing the popular sentiment of the Vietnamese
people in an effort to stop the expansion of socialist economic system.
(D) CAPITALISM’S
INSENSITIVITY
Under capitalism insensitivity to human needs has developed.
For example, Canada and the United States worry about overproduction of food, and actually pay for the reduction of
crops while people starve throughout the world, including on our own doorsteps. Also
the production of goods is determined by its market and not by human need. At
all levels of development industries are run as if they are a good in themselves and should be maintained for their own sake
and not for the welfare of mankind. I would like to see a system where production
is determined by human need.
So
in reply to a question by my American friend “What would replace it (capitalism)?” I would suggest a world government
dedicated to seeing that: (a) everybody was properly fed, clothed, and housed; (b) everyone worked and received a fair
return for their work with none receiving too much; (c) intellectual deve1opment for all to be encouraged; (d) businesses
are the servant to man; (e) the production of war materials end; (f) the ending of all exploitation, including one region
by another or one class by another; (g) and the ending of a press which is controlled by those who make up the ruling class.
Only in countries like the United States can people be so ignorant of what is wrong with capitalism
as to think it to be a perfectly fine system which needs only occasional slight modifications to insure that it will be a
political-economic system lasting for all times. It is time that democracy be
practiced by creating an informed, reasoning public.
