One of our new brewing partners, Dave, says that capitalism doesn't exist. Of course, it exists, I said. But it's not a system, he said. It's not like taxes or the Islanders hockey team.
I wasn't sure where this line of reasoning would take us, but later I wondered if Dave was thinking about the "invisible hand" that guides collective human action. Was Dave saying that the hand doesn't exist? Did he conflate the hand with capitalism?
Early in Josep Pla's The Grey Notebook one of the characters insists that capitalism is not moral or immoral. It's akin to a force of nature. It is nature! the character declares at one point. While it may seem like it sometimes, there's nothing inevitable or natural about capitalism.
So yes, Dave, there is a capitalism.
But sometimes it doesn't seem like it because what we mean when we say the word capitalism is so ill-defined. Most people (it seems) define capitalism to be whatever it is we do to make money. This is so broad an idea that it's not terribly useful.
Even the dictionary definition of capitalism doesn't get it right. My dictionary defines capitalism in such as way that it is restricted to private individuals or owners who engage in trade and industry for a profit. The problem with this definition is that it leaves out two key components, and misleadingly excludes trade and industry engaged in by a state for profit. I've heard people label state run trade and industry as socialism. Is that correct? I don't think so. Not if we are talking about gaining profit from the labor of people employed by whoever the owner might be, be it a private individual, a corporation, or a state. The most important part of the definition of capitalism has to do with the exploitation of the labor of one person for the benefit of another person. That, boys and girls, is the what we mean when we talk about capitalism. Not some nebulous, vague idea about what we do to earn a living. That's the first key component missing from the dictionary definition. The second key part that's missing is the emphasis that the owner controls the means of production. It's this control that makes it possible to exploit labor for a profit.
So next time I see Dave at the brewery, I'll be sure to ask him if there are private individuals, corporations, or states who control the means of production and who are profiting from the labor of others and see how he answers that question.
No comments:
Post a Comment