This Friday series is based on a paper I wrote for my Systematic Theology 2 class earlier in the year. It was a reaction piece to the book The Good of Affluence , by John R. Schneider and represents my own personal wrestling with the contemporary expression of capitalism: consumer capitalism. In light of the current economic crises and meltdown, I thought I would post this each Friday for the next 6 weeks. Enjoy the repost and I hope it helps challenge you in your thoughts and conclusions on capitalism.

The Series
1. Introduction
2. Is Affluence The Point
3. Consumerism: The End Result of Sin Marked-Capitalism
4. Globalization and the Brown Man’s Burden
5. Globalization and Moral Proximity
6. Conclusion

CONSUMERISM: THE END RESULT OF SIN-MARKED CAPITALISM

In a letter to the United Nations dated September 20, 2007, Evo Morales, the President of Bolivia, outlined his frustrations with the First World and their reckless consumption. “The United States and Europe consume, on average, 8.4 times more than the world average,” he wrote. “It is necessary for them to reduce their level of consumption and recognize that all of us are guests on this same land.”
Regardless of the abundance capitalism brings to developing societies, one thing seems clear: even capitalism is marked by sin and creates a climate of consumption that God never intended. Capitalism in all of its benefits and abilities to provide an abundant life for societies eventually morphs into a fallen form that enslaves humans to desire and consumption.

And why should we expect anything different? Capitalism was envisioned during the Enlightenment and thoroughly rooted in classic liberal and modern ideologies, the principles of which exalt the autonomous rational individual to the status of god and empower him or her with the authority to create, and consume, a taylor-made destiny. As a result, the heart of capitalism is the principle of homo economicus, or Economic Man. In short, it insists that Man is an independent rational and self-interested actor who desires the greatest amount of wealth (affluence) and luxuries, avoids unnecessary labor, and possesses the ability to make judgements toward those ends. As John Stuart Mills suggests in the previous definition, the modern economic system of capitalism is rooted in self-interest and intended for individuals to create their own existence through wealth creation. Now to be sure, self-interest is not entirely bad. We do, after all, need to provide for ourselves and families and should be empowered to pursue a good life here on earth. But if capitalism ultimately gestates into consumer capitalism, should we fully advocate an economic model that actively promotes extreme indulgence?

One of the problems the author faces in his defense of capitalism is his failure to honestly address more problematic forms of this legitimate economic system, mainly consumerism. In his book, Schneider claims that Jesus does not call people away from the cosmic good of affluence, which is delight, but rather “directs them not to be rich in a manner the affirms the corrupt and corrupting system and the ways of the people who rule and profit most from it.” The problem, however, resides in his definition, for capitalism is more about self-interest than simply delight. While I affirm the belief that God’s original intent for Creation was abundance, and He is restoring the world to an abundant land “flowing with milk and honey,” it is a far stretch to suggest capitalism is the system God is using to bring about that change. This system is rooted in autonomy, rather than theistic dependence, and self-interest, which conflicts with Jesus vision of the Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus said His system for restoration is not of this world, and the brokenness of America’s consumer capitalistic culture confirms this.

If a society is built upon consumption, it will ultimately seek to maximize that consumption with the least amount of cost. Recent headlines confirm this and have reported on the consequences of the sin-marked status of contemporary capitalism. One of the major results of consumeristic capitalism is the use of slave labor by various corporations, and even state municipalities, to ensure maximum delight with minimum costs. On November 26, 2007, The New York Times reported on the deplorable working conditions of men in India who make manhole covers for the New York City’s Department of Environmental Protection. As the article explained, the men were shirtless, barefoot, sweaty, and whip-thin, working without even basic humane safety standards. The week before, fresh revelations surfaced in the same country that Gap Inc. continues to use contractors that employ child labor, with kids as young as ten years old stitching together cute little polos for suburban ten year olds in America. Finally, contractors for yet another corporation, Victoria’s Secret, force their Jordanian workers to work up to 105 hours a week, while receiving just $.04 compensation per knitted $14 bikini. Needless to say, several multinational corporations go to great lenghts to exploit the principles of capitalism for maximum gain, usually at the expense of others downriver of the American economy.

All of this makes perfect sense, though, in light of homo economicus: capitalism encourages accumulating the most affluence with the least expense, even if it’s at the expense of the suffering of others. While capitalism in its basic form encourages private property, the rule of law, and individual human rights, consumer capitalism warps those goods by maximizing affluence (profuse abundance) for the consumer with the minimum amount of expense, a fact Schneider fails to address. So while capitalism can help create the abundance God intended at Creation, Sin and rebellious human nature exploit its principles in ghastly ways, usually resulting in the oppression and burdening of those unfortunate enough to live in the developing world.