(Tuesday) Max Weber notes "this peculiar idea of a duty to have a vocational calling, so familiar to us today but actually not at all self-evident, is the idea that is characteristic of the "social ethic" of modern capitalist culture" (81). What is the "ethic" or "spirit" or "frame of mind" that Weber tried to describe in these chapters? How is this ethic central to the rise and triumph of capitalism?
(Thursday) Jean and John Comaroff write about a new moment in the history of (global) capitalism which they describe as "millennial capitalism". What are some of the distinctive features of millennial capitalism? What are some of the economic structures (think Marx) and the ethos (think Weber) that characterizes millennial capitalism?
In the section on page 81 of "The 'Spirit' of Capitalism" it made me think of the whole reason for education. It talks about a person's 'duty' to have a vocation in life to generate capital to live. In today's world it is drilled into our heads at an early age that we have to go through elementary school, high school, and college, so that we can acquire skills (and debt) towards our choice of vocation.
ReplyDeleteThe aspect of student loans alone generated by a person attending college is a form of capitalism that is thriving. It is discussed in the reading as well. The banks or businesses that are set up as loan companies are a somewhat easy form of capitalism. Handing out loans on credit for a person to buy something that they do not currently have the money for; such as student loans, or house loans, or car loans. Then they pack on large amounts of interest and make a profit as they are slower paid back a greater sum of money then they handed out.
The aspect of wage workers was discussed in the text as well, which is another part of capitalism. On page 84 it says "People are paid according to the fruits of their labors." In today's factories or farming industries there are usually a few people on top that run the company then sometimes thousands of workers making the product. These people in charge can have a general low wage, and then pay the workers by the amount of product they can make. On the next page it states "people work only because, and only so long as, they are poor." The workers are working to make a wage so that they can make enough to live on and then have enough leftover to not be considered 'poor'. If the capitalist that run these companies can make a lot of product while paying the workers enough to essentially keep them poor, and keep themselves rich, the cycle stays the same. The sense of the 'social ethic' to work also plays into this that it is seen as a somewhat requirement for a person to be working and earning a wage, even if it is a low wage.
The "ethic", "spirit", or "frame of mind" that Weber is referring to as playing a central role in the birth of the capitalistic economy is that of protestant ideology that values hard work, and individual role ("calling") in society, and time, as well as post-enlightenment rationality. The idea of this rigidity to duty in society, and the intense focus on time and money as displayed in the excerpt by Benjamin Franklin, Weber describes as an ethos in itself. Protestantism in the United States engrained this worldview into the public's conscious, which was a direct way to how we thought about money and the emergence of a capitalistic society. For instance, the idea of time being money is reflected in the way that we work: before regulation on an eight hour workday, people were working twelve plus hour shifts, and it was assumed simply that the longer and harder you worked the more money you would earn. The emphasis was put on the individual's duty to perform and to work "hard". Now, although we have an eight hour work day, the mindset remains. We also feel a certain duty to whatever profession we fall under, as it is common to think of our line of work not only as something that identifies us, but that is also our calling and it something we must devote time and hard work to.
ReplyDeleteThis ethic was central to the rise of capitalism because without this mindset it would have been impossible to make people work the hours that they worked for the poor wages they received. If they saw the work as their duty, and their livelihood and income as time, they would not only accept this way of life but aim to work harder for longer, to prove they were worthy of their money and dutiful to their calling or individual role in society. This ethos takes blame off of employers and larger structural forces and put it in the hands of the workers. It says: if you aren't making enough money to feed your family, it is probably because you are not working hard enough.
It seems that for Weber, the "spirt" of capitalism seems to be the idea that capitalism is to value one's work. It seems that for capitalism to do what it does, there has to first be the idea that someone's time is worth so much money, and that some people believe that the money they earn is worth their time. Webb gives a rather excellent example for the first idea in his book on pages 84-85. For part of pages 84-85, Weber mentions that a person earning so much to work a field will likely work even less on that same field should they be paid more to work the same field. This may be because the person has a otherwise well life and does not wish to work more for the extra money, nut instead, he will work less for the same amount of mmoney. On the other hand, a person who believes that he should spend more of his time for some amount of money may feel that he should spend more of his time to get his extre money. In this way, this second person might actually be encouraged to work longer on a field so that they may earn more.
ReplyDeleteAs for how capitalism came to be the major system that most of ususe in our day to day lives, it may be because over time, people felt that they can get the most of their time if they felt that they can get the most money from their time. This may be because people believed that their work ethic should be based on using one's money to support themselves. This work ethic might then have encouraged one to make use of one's time to make more money so that they could support and better support themselves. Even if a worker is not making much now, they may feel that in time that they will rise to some new position and make more, or simple make more in their position by virtue of their gained experence in what they do.
In my opinion, after reading Jean and John Comaroff, millennial capitalism has to deal with liberation. The name "millennial" refers to a change in time, a millennium. When there is a change in time and in politics, liberation could either circulate or endanger the outcome. The distinct features I noticed was the idea that because times are changing, so are the ethics of citizens. What they believe in is becoming transformed into new ideas. Human rights are being tested as well as entitlement to yourself. This goes hand in hand with the new ideas about exclusion, gender, sexuality, and class relevance.
ReplyDeleteMillennial capitalism transforms our world from those who are disempowered to those who have that empowerment within them to create and implement change within our economy.
This new form of capitalism begins to mold society into this new and cultured form. It is a means of rebirth as Marx or Weber would suggest. The materialistic world has given consumers new products that will soon start to consume their own lives. Something that Jean and Comaroff talk about briefly is how much gambling has effected our economy. Immoral accumulation is the idea that people bet in order for their personal betterment. Because casinos and lottery tickets have been created to suck up as much consumers as possible, it is running our system on its own. Humans want to be the better man, so they set wages and bets against others or themselves in order to become the most wealthy whether it be by money or by self-empowerment and identity. Money runs the world as it is sad to say, but this new millennium is provided a clear and fresh outlook on the way things used to be and how things have changed within economic and political power of consumerism.
Before I started reading Millennial Capitalism and the Culture of Neoliberalism, I thought that I was going to be reading about a change in just the consumer, but that wasn't the case. Jean and John Comaroff explore why and how the concept of the consumer has changed. This change was spurred on and connected to a change in religion, politics and ethics. They all feed off of one another, and without one of these key connections capitalism would not be where it is today.
ReplyDeleteThe first connection between the shift in capitalism is a change of perspective on religion. Greed, once seen as a sin, was now a good thing. People were encouraged to make risky financial decisions in the pursuit of more capital. This was discussed using gambling and casinos as a prime social example. Studies have shown that people, especially the jobless youth, look towards gambling as a way to make fast cash. It is a form of instant gratification. Consumers are told that it is better to have more money, even it comes to an expense to you. The government and other political parties benefit from the public spending their money at casinos and on lottery tickets. It is used as a source of quick revenue, therefore the government, both state and federal, benefit from endorsing such risky financial behavior. It is not just the government that seeks a benefit from the changing economic climate.
The capitalistic economy of today drives society. When new trends are set and the masses go out in search of the must have item of the season, many companies and manufactures use that as an opportunity to open up a new market. The consumer is now seen as the driving force of capitalism, not the producer. This causes a devaluation of labor power allowing the system to treat people as a source of inefficiency. Capital is becoming autonomous of labor. By devaluing labor, the human qualities of laborers are devalued, meaning so is their role in society. This has caused the class system to slowly corrode, as it has become harder and harder for members of the working class to achieve the American dream of living comfortably in the middle class. Our society has been replaced by a market that tries to cater to every social need that any interest group may have. global youth cultures are seeking desire, self-expression, and representation and their are manufactures out there that are more than ready to give them what they want.
Capitalism thrives off of people believing that they always need more of everything, especially money. The American dream and the idea of American exceptionalism was based off of that drive to always have more. But it was this same way of thinking that lead many to believe that our economy and many of the big corporations that help run it were "too big to fail". The economic crash that rocked the United States in 2008 is a great example of what can happen when the economy relies too heavily on the consumer to create more capital. The trends presented by Jean and John Comaroff are very familiar because they can be observed in society today just about anywhere. If we are not careful and allow those trends to go unchecked, the United States could face another economic crisis, just as bad as 2008, further down the road.