Sviesta Ciba |

gnidrologs (
gnidrologs) rakstīja,
@ 2021-04-19 07:47:00
Nothing wrong with trade, economy, capital, private property.

The problem with capitalism is the "ism" part. It is the idea the entire purpose of a society is to produce capital and wealth. In ancient civilizations, economic concerns were only secondary if not tertiary to the interests of the society, which were sacred first and foremost (in healthy traditional societies) and temporal secondarily (temporal in terms of authority and power, usually military).

Economic "values" are purely and exclusively concerned with quantity, where as traditional societies were centered around qualitative questions. Capitalism pushes quality out of the way and makes quantity its chief concerns. Where ancient societies were content with very little, the very thing that allows capitalism to survive is a continuous increase in material goods and wealth.

If traditional societies were "space" oriented, and thus static, capitalistic societies are concerned with time, and are thus intended to be moving towards something by design, that something being an ever greater accumulation of everything pertaining to quantity. The end result is that what is considered to be highest is that which has the highest price attached to it. Works of art are no longer valued based on their merits, but on their value in a purely economic sense. The highest the price, the greatest the artwork. We see this mentality at work with everything, where objects of complete no worth whatsoever are seen as immensely valuable depending on how much they cost, or by how "rare" they are (monetary value increasing proportionality as quantity of supply decreases, irreplaceability envisioned again in purely quantitative terms so the "one" now is no longer the sacred one of divine unity, the ultimate qualitative value, but the "singularity", so that a completely worthless industrial product is now seen as immensely valuable provided it is "unique" and it is "one of a kind").

Lastly, capitalism is inherently atheistic and materialistic and thus Darwinist. Survival of the fittest is the essence of "laissez faire economics". Human beings are seen as monads or isolated economic agents whose existence, esteem and social acceptance relies entirely on economic success. Men who in former times were seen as the highest (contemplatives, ascetics, saints etc) are now considered lowest due to their lack of materialistic concerns, the lack of industry they demonstrate and their poor economic sense. The ancient conception of caste, where individuals were seen as part of a greater role and where each was valued for the function they provided for the others without which society could not operate is shattered and the world is now divided between those who are "successful" and those who have "failed" who are now forced to do the bidding of the first. The role of the farmer, the craftsman, even the soldier, those are no longer seen as indispensable occupations bearing the honor proper to them to the individual who performs them, but are seen as the things those who have "failed" to become economically "successful" are "forced" into in order to "survive" (for man now lives to work and eat, rather than the other way around).

It goes without saying that the highest values are also now those of those individuals who have become economically "successful", even if those individuals are idiots. Bourgeoise values become the defining traits of our civilization. Economic stability, "culture", the great "novels" of the 19th century (all of which were devoted in dragging man away from the transcendent and into the mundane "every day" lives of imaginary people), and "religion" at its most anti-intellectual and sentimental vulgarization. Gone is the idea the purpose of man is that of transcending himself, either through inwardness and detachment or by risking one's lives in deeds of heroism, combat and the like. Gone is the idea life down here is merely a fleeting and transitory step towards something greater in the next life. Now all that matters is success in this world, success defined in a neo-liberal sense. Becoming the CEO of a big company, giving TED talks about subjects one doesn't actually know jack shit about, those are the marks of the people who "made it". And for the rest, there is only consumption of pointless goods the needs of which were artificially created by the machine of merchandise propaganda.

The essence of everything i said was symbolized perfectly by Christ chasing the money lenders and the merchants out of the temple, which in a more universal sense is a symbol of the true temple of God, which is within us, being soiled by worldliness, the same worldliness modern society seeks to drag everybody into it.
(Lasīt komentārus)
Nopūsties:
Navigate:
