Mises.org, Working Paper update
First, Jeff Tucker & everyone at the LvMI deserve heartfelt thanks for the work they've done to make the Institute's resources available to everybody. Right now, I have the pleasure of watching Hans-Herman Hoppe give his lecture on empiricism at the bottom of my screen while I write a blog entry, prepare for my lecture tonight, and work on my dissertation. The world is a better place.
That said, I've updated an earlier working paper on Christianity and commerce. This version, called "The Market's Benevolent Tendencies," addresses globalization and is forthcoming as a chapter in Nicholas Capaldi's edited volume Business and Religion: A Clash of Civilizations.
Comments (3)
Will the real Christian view of capitalism stand up?
The Vatican's encyclical of the mid-1960's, which castigated capitalism, had the Italian Communist Party applauding.
I hear evangelical Christians today declaring that capitalism is "evil" as is money!
These same people viewing man as "fallen" and haveing a "bad nature".
As someone that was never taught these horrors along with the evil emotions of guilt and fear, it was and remains shocking to hear these utterances.
The clue as to why Christians do so rests with the ethic that has caused so much sorrow in the ages. This is the ethic formally coined by Augustus Compte. It is termed "altruism".
This being the ethic that self-sacrifice is the highest virtue, value and duty. No greater love has man than to lay down his life for another? Or as occurs and is the Nietsche definition of "selfishness" [which is in fact not selfishness but another part of altruism], that man can do as he pleases as long as it is in his interests, sacrificing the rights of others......
Capitalism and altruism oppose each other, and unless Christianity opposes altruism, how can it support capitalism?
This contradiction must surely find Christians battling with themselves.
Published: August 2, 2004 9:45 PM
David:
As you rightly point out, there is a certain strain within Christianity which encourages a kind of Levinasian self-sacrificial ethic, which would probably (if enacted) render the market system inoperable; however, it is neither the 'real' nor the best social or ethical theory within the Christian tradition.
The specific Biblical passage that you (mis)quoted* was not celebrating the laying down of one's life for an unknown, nameless, or abstract other, but rather for 'one's friends.' This may seem a minor point, but this Johannine stress on concrete gifts of self to friends exempifies an ethic of Christian Eudaimonism, which is much more at ease with a private property order (in which mutual aid and charity have and would flourish) than with, say, a gigantic federal bureau administering on behalf of the welfare of the masses from afar.
It is only certain forms of ethical egoist arguments for capitalism (Randian rather than Aristotelian) that would be objectionable to a Christian Eudaimonist.
I think the important point that Art's article makes is that welfarist policies which may have been intended to help the "least of these" in fact do them grave harm. The commandment to love one's neighbor cannot be rightly obeyed (no matter how pure and benevolent one's intentions) by advocating or enacting policies which economic science has conclusively shown will only worsen the plight of the poor and the least fortunate among us. Unless good intentions are coupled with knowledge, judgment, and technique, they are nothing more than ineffectual and counter-productive feelings.
Cheers,
Dag Rowe
* John 15:13 -- Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.
Published: August 3, 2004 10:25 AM
This article doesn't address 2 very important aspects that I believe make this article a bit disingenuous. First of all, there is no mention of monetary inflation as an oppressive force, i.e. it discourages savings and redistributes wealth to those who caused the inflation in the first place, i.e. the Central Banks. Second of all, where is the nature of man in this article? A Christian usually assumes that the nature of man is evil, redeemed only by the grace of God. A capitalist who follows the rules can easily be shown to be beneficial to society. What about the very common scenario involving corruption, embezzlement, fraud? A capitalist run amok might produce shoddy goods and sell them at a high price much to the detriment of society. What about consumer safety and property rights? Counterfit designer clothing, dangerous cars and other goods come to mind.
These are a couple of issues that I wonder about after reading your article and wonder how you might address these. For the most part, however, I agree with you.
Published: August 3, 2004 1:33 PM