VALUES AND MONETARY SUPREMACY
In the introduction I attributed the true source of the popularity of the term values to its economic origins. Though other reasons were found to exist, our society’s obsession with money was regarded as the central reason why values has become our term of choice when discussing and evaluating human behavior. Our values are viewed as being the basis and at the heart of all our ethical and moral decisions. Our values define who we are, prioritize our options and are at the core of our personality and character.
Our values are dependent upon the value we place on not only every object we see and situation we encounter, but also on almost every emotion and thought we possess. Yet, isn’t it extreme to assert that everything in life has an economic value? Aren’t we taking the association of values with economic value too far?
Even if everything were to be found to have a cost or value, wasn’t that always the case? How can we say our society is any more money conscious than it ever was? Why then, has values been a recent addition to our common vocabulary?
Let’s first take a moment to try to find some free things in our society. At first glance many things look like they are free. We are able to move without someone shoving their hand in our face asking for money. Yet, does that mean we aren’t being charged.
The land in all the cities is owned by someone. The land you live on, you either bought or is factored into your rent. Your taxes pay for the sidewalks you use and the parks you visit and play in. Every step you take is on private, state or national land which carries a price tag.
Sometimes the charges are obvious, like when you stop at a toll booth, pay to enter an amusement park or play on a handball court. Other times the charges are hidden in taxes in which case we pay the bill without thinking of everything we are being charged for, from street and baseball diamond maintenance to paper work and public servants.
Everything involved with food, shelter and health care obviously cost us money. Even our air and water has many price tags. First, we pay for our air to be polluted by industries, then we often pay a second time (often to the same corporation) for devices such as filters to remove the very same pollutants from the air. Many gas stations now even charge us to put air in tires.
Even if we avoid pay toilets, we still have a number of service providers cashing in on our natural functions, including the sanitation and health departments, paper and drug companies. Though sometimes we can speak for free, there are many situations in which we must pay for the privilege to speak or even listen. We pay directly or indirectly anytime we attend conferences, church or partake in any civic gathering.
We are often charged for our thoughts, feelings and ideas, especially if we desire to share or express them. Therapy is only the most blatant form of how we pay for our thoughts and feelings. Most forms of expression demand a medium which costs money, such as paper, computers, telephones, musical instruments and art supplies to name but a few. Learning too, carries a steep price tag, from trade schools and universities to television, tutors and books. Even the “free” books at the public library are funded through our taxes.
One would be hard pressed to find even one totally free activity untied to any direct or indirect expense in our society. Yet, even though our basic economic theory has existed generally unchanged over the last two hundred years, the range and intensity of our commercialism has drastically increased over the last few decades.
As our urban population swells, so does the amount and area of cities in our nation. Not too long ago, many American’s lived in or near fairly virgin land. Rural and wilderness areas are shrinking and with them is the opportunity for us to visit and walk on inexpensive and relatively free land. Each day sections of earth previously undisturbed are being used for commercial purposes. Inexpensive, unincorporated lands near cities are annexed, causing an immediate rise in taxes for all those living in these areas.
Yesterday’s prairies, wetlands, forests and parks become today’s suburbs as engorged urban populations swallow up surrounding territory. As hundred and thousand acre lots become divided into a swarm of tiny residential plots, the expense of the land rises with property values. The vertical rise in the commercial and multi-dwelling structures is directly reflected in the meteoric climb of expenses of those traversing or living next to these mammoth buildings.
Every nook and cranny of exploitable land and the air above it is being used for commercial purposes. Cities running out of land need only to build taller buildings to capitalize on every available penny. Each penny spent is an investment in future profit, which means all space even up to the clouds is becoming more expensive for modern man.
In sciences such as partical physics, chemistry and bio-genetics we are finding ways to capitalize on every molecule and sub-atomic particle. Industries and corporations are battling for ownership of parts of genes and molecules. Once owning the commercial rights to these “commodities”, they will be able to charge us for their regulated use.
The commercial world is teeming. Every nook and cranny of existence is being converted into a commercial product. The moment a new electronic invention hits the market, a series of new businesses emerge tending to the production, maintenance and servicing of the product.
Though one might be able to argue that nothing was ever free, it cannot be disputed the density of commercialism is growing geometrically. The speed and range of commercialism has skyrocketed since the end of the World Wars. A global economy has formed reducing the amount of free space and drastically increasing the cost of commercial space all over the planet.
People talk of the communications explosion ushered in by the discovery of electricity and modern machinery. They talk of how small the world has become because of transportation devices such as the car, train and airplane. Also recognized in shrinking the planet is the role played by devices such as the radio, television, telephone and computer.
As the planet shrinks the pervasiveness of commercial exchange intensifies. The speed by which business transactions are conducted has quickened dramatically over the last three decades. Products which used to take months by ship to arrive, are now transported in days. Exchanges of information which could take weeks by phone and mail, now are concluded in seconds thanks to the instantaneous communication offered by computers, the internet, cell phones and fax machines. Transactions on the major stock exchanges themselves have sped up dramatically. Reactions to market trends and volatility of individual stocks occur almost instantaneously with even the moderately interested investor able to comfortably watch the ticker at home on his television, or his computer screen.
The snowball of commerce took a long time before becoming the avalanche of modern life. Life for the average worker could amble along at a relatively slow pace well into the 20th century. Before the popularization of television and the computer the time between potential business transactions could be hours. Now, our streets are lined with businesses frantically vying for our business with flashy seductive signs and advertised deals. Our recreation time is likewise dominated by incessant advertisements for countless products. Television, radio, movies and magazines are often times little more than window dressing for the products and services being forced on us from every angle.
Not to long ago a good portion of many people’s business did not directly involve money. Even professions such as doctors and lawyers were not adverse to barter, or finding an alternative means of compensation for their services. People were less concerned with money, and those who were monetarily ambitious were careful not to alienate their friends and customers by appearing obsessed with money. Yet, now times have changed and the average person has no qualms displaying their love of money openly.
We are involved in an ever escalating capitalistic colonization where everything real and imaginary can become the commercial property of an individual or corporation. Anything in the universe able to be named, identified or theorized is capable of becoming the personal commercial domain of a business enterprise. The entire teeming telescopic and microscopic universes are, therefore, open game for commercial exploitation. Meaning unlimited profit for some, and escalating expense for all.
Almost everything we can see touch, feel, taste, smell, hear or even imagine now has a value, a price tag tied to the capricious volatility of free enterprise. In a society where everything has a value and the respective values of everything from products to activities to time itself dictates how we live, it should not be at all surprising that our codes of behavior are based on our values.
The landscape of our daily life is filled with the respective values of all we encounter. The value of any commodity be it real or imaginary is extremely elastic in our culture. Everything from the relative worth of our labor time to our car is in a constant state of flux. The market value or worth of any object changes often, sometimes daily. Our ability to make decisions in such a society likewise needs to be flexible and adaptable.
Morals, ethics and principles have always been fairly inflexible and rigid terms. Even though these terms were intended to guide us into making prudent decisions and engaging in right conduct, they were thought to be somewhat eternal. One’s morality was to remain a constant in life. One’s ethics and principles, likewise, transcended the viscidities of the situation remaining firm and unalterable.
The value of any product is free to fluctuate and adapt to the unique dynamics of the current situation. We, surrounded by a world of values, are all but demanded to remain flexible. The goal of modern values is to be more flexible than the other terms, while staying true to their basic integrity. Our personal values are able to adapt to the uniqueness of a given situation while retaining the highest standards and expectations available given the realities of the situation.
Another advantage values has over any other term is its universality. No matter how diplomatic and open minded any nation is, it is impossible to rectify the cultural differences in their ideals. There is no avoiding the fact that there are, and will continue to be irreconcilable differences between the morality, ethics and principles of any two nations, cultures or religions. Existing differences in morals and ethics between cultures and nations often result in the intense conflicts which give rise to war. Differences in the assorted values of products and commodities, on the other hand, are just part and parcel of doing business. Though economic differences can lead to battle, it is more likely the underlying morals and politics of a culture propel them towards war.
Our global economic community puts us all on the same playing board. The rules of commerce are mainly dictated by what is most profitable, and therefore, understandable to any nation willing to play. Modern commerce is a common language which cuts across many cultural conflicts which are inherent in rigid concepts such as morality and ethics.
A nation’s principles and morals give them an economic style, but do not necessarily bar them from investing themselves in a global economy. Efforts at forming international consensus of morals and ethics are far more difficult to achieve, and agreement is usually attained in only most basic and general of issues.
Since money is everywhere even the most reluctant of nations is finding it difficult to resist becoming active members of a global economy. Even though the US controls or has its hands in many key commercial ventures in almost every land on the globe, the role of every nation is vital in the daily operation of the world economy.
In assessing why values has become such a popular and ubiquitous term we have noted a few things. First, our love affair of values is a natural outcome of our obsession with economic value. Monetary issues more than any other, dominate our international as well as personal existence. Our values are anchored in the value we place on value itself. This is not to say that only money matters or has value, but money is the foundation of our entire practical existence.
To summarize, values has become our term of choice regarding our codes of behavior for several reasons. Unlike the other terms concerned with right behavior, values is a flexible term able to adapt to the practical realities of modern life. Its economic roots give it a utilitarian advantage over the rigid and inflexible ideals which we previously used to help govern our behavior. Since everything in life has an economic as well as emotional value, the term values is able to address each and every aspect of our existence. There is no event or thought to small for the concept of values.
The economic reality of a global economy forms the basis of a third reason or the superiority of values as a term addressing human conduct. The morality, ethics and principles of a culture being steeped in specific beliefs, philosophies, customs, laws, arts and sciences, create formidable walls of difference. Values, being less tied to cultural differences and history is better prepared to bridge the gap of finding a common language.
Capitalism: Defeating its Foes
Our love affair with values and are obsession with monetary concerns appear to be interconnected. Years ago many people resisted the tendency to base life on the value of money. What happened to those concerns?
Americans have not always embraced our system of free enterprise with such fervor. Objections to capitalism have come from intellectuals and common men alike ever since its inception. Since the beginning days of the industrial revolution many people have feared the possible destruction of the soul of man through the over-emphasis of money. Religious figures, moralists and philosophers cautioned and warned man of the dangers inherent in monetary ambition. The desire for wealth was equated with greed and avarice, and directly opposed to the Christian qualities of charity and compassion. A person focused on wealth could not focus on God or his fellow man. “Money”, as every school boy was taught, “is the root of all evil”.
Such sentiments were not only preached from the pulpit, but felt in the heart of most common laborers. The average worker concerned himself with providing food for his family, not with having a career. Owners and bosses were seldom respected by the workers, and most employees harbored no desire to become bosses.
Social thinkers such as Marx focused on the “alienation” caused by mass production and labor. Alienation coupled with the divisions caused by class distinctions between owners and workers were viewed as explosive enough to cause the eventual downfall of capitalism.
Though no downfall came to pass, one cannot overlook the tensions that exist between owners and workers. As Marx had predicted the bitter feelings sometimes turned into worker revolts in many industrialized nations. Our labor unions were formed from the strikes and protests fostered by the friction between labor and management.
The tensions between labor and management are still common in every corporation and business in America. Yet, a national uprising against management becomes more doubtful each passing year. Even though the percentage of people living in poverty has remained high, and the monetary gap between workers and owners continues to grow, more people appear content with the free enterprise system than ever before.
The factors leading to our growing acceptance of free enterprise and the resulting gaps between the wealthy and the poor are numerous and complex. Instead of writing an entire book on the reasons for the emergence of modern commerce, I’ll just mention a few of the more simple reasons.
Marxists who predicted the demise of capitalism did so by the premise of a workers revolt. The exploited and personally alienated slave labor would band together to rise up and over throw the power elite owners. The labor versus management battle which still smolders today has lost a lot of its momentum over the years.
The boss/slave, labor/management conflict at the core of Marxist revolution has undergone many changes over the last century. In the early days of capitalism the structure of the average factory and business was fairly simple. You did indeed have an owner, usually somewhat visible, and a flock of workers he hired and fired. Owners seldom hid their wealth, making themselves an easy target of jealousy and hatred by dressing and acting differently than their employees. Shoving their wealth, position and power in the faces of all they employed the industrialist was an obvious owner of slaves.
Through the years as industry and business expanded the simple two tier system was disposed of for a number of reasons. First, as owners bought out competitive businesses they gave the old owners non labor positions in the company. No matter how humiliating the take over was, the old owner usually retained a supervisory position over the common worker.
Just through sheer expansion itself, owners were forced to delegate management positions to others in helping supervise the workers. When these things happened the owner/boss-worker/slave dyad had settled into the labor-management division.
Since the end of WWII the emergence of very large corporations and businesses has further blurred the distinction between owner and worker. The sheer numbers of tasks and employees demanded that a number of intermediary positions be created. Corporations have a number of divisions, in which a host of presidents, vice-presidents, assistant and associate presidents and vice-presidents supervise professional technicians and engineers, who likewise supervise foremen and supervisors, who oversee a well heirarchied work force.
Over the last few decades the division between labor and management is getting blurred and difficult to distinguish. In today’s marketplace even smaller agencies and businesses have a number of layers of power. The smallest promotion in modern business often results in a worker having supervisory responsibilities over other workers.
Even entry level workers specializing in a specific skill or technique can be given a managerial role of responsibility in their given area. This means that while remaining on the bottom of the corporate totem pole in terms of pay scale and job description an employee may function as a supervisor in his or her area of expertise. One cannot always state that one division is more important than another, therefore, a strict hierarchal chain of command is often impossible to distinguish in even moderate sized business organizations.
The multi-level organizational pattern of modern business often makes it impossible for one to distinguish between labor and management. Even when the administrative cut off point is not arbitrary many of those functioning as laborers have fellow workers they supervise or instruct.
The days of the owner as sole power player are over. In the modern work place power and position is shared by many people. In today’s business world it is rare to find a worker with seniority totally without any roles of power or authority.
A great percentage of today’s workers enjoy (at least occasionally) the fruits of power and position. Though they are exploited and treated as a commodity, they themselves treat others in much the same way. The end result is that most workers are seduced and corrupted by the system and the power it affords.
A salesman who feels abused and exploited by his supervisors will in turn feel a sense of power and retribution when he in turn sells his product to a customer at an inflated price. Though his bosses take an unwarranted portion of his profits, he in turn regains his self-esteem by taking advantage of trusting customers.
In our society almost everyone is given some opportunities to exploit and capitalize on others. This is the free enterprise system available to all. Our acceptance of the system comes from the fact that almost all of us use the system to our advantage. No matter how low on the social economic ladder we might be, we all partake in the exploitation of our fellow man.
Though some bemoan the practices of modern business, most have learned to accept them as a necessary part of life. Our standards make adjustments to the real world, and the flexibility of values accommodates these changes much better than any other term.
The competitive nature of free enterprise resulted in the creation of multi-national corporations and huge conglomerates. In these vast structures it was inevitable that the owner-worker dyad would have to be replaced by a more diversified field of power and responsibilities. As technology advanced the administrative divisions had to share their power and position with other divisions such as research and development, engineering and sales.
Smaller organizations desiring to be successful modeled themselves after the larger corporations taking on their multi-layered approach. This protracted managerial style made it difficult for workers movements to grow.
In a structure of unclear divisions between labor and management no one knows who to ally themselves with in a workers revolt. In a system where a large percentage of the work force share (at least minimally) in the fruits of power and control over others it is difficult to organize a workers rebellion.
Offering a few crumbs of power to corrupt and influence the average worker was not always done accidentally. When workers gained political leverage through organizing unions and worker reform groups, it is not pure coincidence that industries and corporations began to restructure their organizations. Advertising, public relations and sales departments were well aware of how to influence the psychology of both the worker and the consumer. The business world had the best PR money could buy. Winning the loyalty and allegiance of the worker became a high priority for corporate America. The goal of acquiring worker loyalty without sharing a large percentage of the profits was accomplished by many.
History, too, was favorable to the dissolution of popular resistance to the acceptance of monetary supremacy and free enterprise. The people’s revolt in Russia in 1917 had world wide implications. Humanitarians, liberals and many intellectuals hailed the Russian Revolution as a precursor to the over throw of all worker oppression. The Marxist view of freedom gained popularity and its somewhat abstruse theory began to be watered down for mass consumption. Communistic and socialistic ideals fueled the rhetoric behind all social movements. In the U.S., Marxist ideas were central to the public demand for social security, labor unions, paid vacations, workers compensation, the 40 hour work week, and almost every other worker’s right gained in this century.
While worker movements grew in this country, corporate America was busy trying to discredit the ideologies fueling social change (Marxism, Communism and Socialism). Equating democracy with capitalism became a popular theme. The average American was being sold on the idea that Communism was a threat to Democracy and not the ally of social change.
The fears garnered during two world wars and the Depression were easy to arouse and direct towards Communism. The emerging affluence of the U.S. following these troublesome times forged a formidable national pride. Riding the waves of good fortune, the business world was able to share a minimal portion of the wealth being generated with a sizeable middle class.
By this time the civil atrocities of Soviet Communism were easy to depict. Whatever truth and benefit Marxist ideas contained were destroyed by its association with Soviet Communism. Just as democracy was equated with capitalism, Marxist ideals were being equated with the Soviet totalitarian state. The American media and business world made certain that no American could support any Marxist idea without being viewed as a supporter of the oppressive practices of the USSR.
The Red Scare of the fifties just sealed the coffin for the expression of Marxist ideals in the U.S. Since any utterable criticism of capitalism could be found in Marx it would be viewed as treason for any loyal American to question the practices of capitalism. The taboo of Marxism in America signalled the death of any social movement in the U.S. which called into question the economic practices of capitalism.
By the end of the fifties almost all political discussion regarding any alternatives to our functioning system of commerce died. Since then almost all ethical condemnations and moral warnings regarding a life preoccupied with monetary concerns have come from the pulpit.
Clergy from all denominations and faiths often warned their parishioners of the harms and evils inherent in making money too important. Not only did they profess that spiritual matters were more important than fiscal ones, but so were many practical matters. The faithful were frequently told that religious qualities such as compassion, charity, forgiveness, honesty and truth were far more important ingredients to living a good and comfortable life than having a lot of money.
Money was accepted as essential for survival, and an important and practical tool for the success of missionary work throughout the globe. Yet, monetary ambition was an evil, a temptation from the devil, standing in the way of God’s grace. A man moving towards money was surely a man running from salvation and towards damnation.
It is still common for modern religious figures to warn their parishioners of the dangers of worshiping money. Yet, the verbal passion in insisting on financial restraint has subsided. This growing tolerance of fiscal priorities might be explained by increased exposure of churches to the economic realities of competition.
The number of one parish communities continues to shrink. The number and variety of churches in a community is growing. Churches are often in competition with each other for the same parishioners. The survival of a parish often depends on the very same dynamics as any other business. They need to sell themselves to the public and attain a market share to cover their overhead. Without generating a sizable profit, a church may lose out to a neighboring church that is more attractive, comfortable and having the resources available to have a positive impact on the community. Wealthy churches inspire confidence in their ability to be effective and influential in both charitable and political concerns.
Clergy desiring to have their parish not only survive but thrive are forced to accept the economic realities of the real world. Often times they need to walk a thin line between exhorting their flock to live a spiritual and not material existence, and asking for their financial assistance to execute their charitable and moral ideals. Harping too long and hard on the evils of money may either alienate their parishioners into finding another parish, or may cause their incessant requests for donations to look hypocritical.
All of the preceding arguments and points only scratch the surface in helping explain why monetary concerns have become supreme in our society. Monetary issues pervade our personal and professional existence. Other concerns no matter how important are almost impossible to divorce from the intricate web of commerce modern life is woven into. The political and social taboo of even questioning our free enterprise system strengthens its hold on our lives while making even the possibility of an alternative way of life seem impossible. In such an environment any criticism of the free enterprise system is at best unrealistic and more likely unpatriotic, revolutionary or just plain crazy.
If our values are based on the value we place on everything in our life from objects to thoughts, then it is difficult to overestimate the role of economics in our personal and social value systems.