A Greed-Free Economy?

The quantitative dynamics of growth in capitalism are perpetuated by the subjects of the economy. As producers and consumers, they provide an inner mechanism that goads them into working and consuming to the verge of overexertion: greed, the driving force behind wanting more, achieving more, consuming more.

How would then an economy work in which greed does not have the role of an individual driving force? For a moment. let us assume that greed is not one of the anthropological constants – i.e. not an innate or permanently influential quality – but an acquired, pathological pattern, which can be checked, mastered, and transformed. We could then make the assumption that all mankind can be almost completely free from greed if they want to be, and that if this were to occur on a grand scale it would cause a paradigm shift in economy.        

Greedless people consume only what they “really need”. What do we mean by this? Critics of the world of products and advertisements have pointed out that needs do not just exist but can also be created, or even implanted into people. No one “needed” a mobile phone before it was invented and made attractive to the masses. No one needs the thirty-fifth brand of yoghurt thrown onto the market: neither do any of us need the twelfth flavour enhancer in our mineral water or the latest fashion label conquering the boutiques. Nevertheless, we consume and fancy rioting in the land of shopping opportunity. The desires that motivate the consumption of luxury goods are not independent but culturally ingrained. The culture in question is of course that of materialism; and materialism is in turn steered, geared, and fed by capitalism. People’s needs, then, not only perpetuate capitalism but let it grow even fatter.

What are independent needs then?

I do not want to answer this question by referring to a popular model like Maslow’s or Herzberg’s. One would first have to investigate into the respective backgrounds of such models, in order to dispose of the remnants of ideologies that some materialist ideas have stolen into. Instead, we could ask ourselves the question what it is that we really need to live a good life.

Here we could do a little experiment, where we contemplate whether we could be happy and content if the flat we lived in were smaller, if we didn’t have a car and didn’t take flights to exotic places for vacations, had no rare delicacies, no Christmas trees, etc.

In other words, we imagine that things we take for granted disappear, one by one, until we hit a certain boundary where we lose our contentment. This is the point where our truly independent needs begin. Of course, it is not a fixed boundary:

Then we will probably realize that we do not actually need many of the things we possess (except if we already live in the border area of the country of independent needs). Amongst these things will be such that we appreciate for their beauty and their symbolic or memo value; such that were once important to us but have lost their attractiveness; and such that never brought us satisfaction after we purchased them.

      

Next thing we could do is consider true quality in our lives: what do we have that we like, that motivates and excites us, that nourishes and fosters our inner growth: interpersonal relations, encounters with nature and art, and experiences still exceeding all that. We could ask ourselves whether we have enough or too much of these, or if we need still more. We will realize that the material requirements for true quality are relatively low.

A greedless society need not be a poor society. On the contrary: it is one that will not put up with qualitative poverty. Not only will it call for the end of the social evils of undernourishment and homelessness, but it will also insist on true contentment for its members. Greed is perpetuated by a subconscious need for security, subject to the delusion that we will be safe from imaginary dangers if we only accumulate worldly goods. Not realizing that it is really seeking to be free from fear, it is fixated on the objects of its desire, which promise security and satisfaction. If the irrational need disappears because the fears behind it have been conquered, the urge for amassing goods, whether they be items, money or relationships, disappears as well.                        

Then the worldly and quantitative values (including the immaterial patterns of capitalism) will have only a subordinate role. They serve to maintain the status quo of survival but do not contribute to the improvement of life. Through food and drink the body survives and, ideally, stays in good shape. Other worldly necessities, such as clothes, accommodation and cleanliness, belong to the same category. What will become more important and interesting to a greedless society are social and creative values: communication, beauty, art, leisure, sports, etc.: and none of these necessarily require a lot of resources.

Thus, we can cut back the circulation of worldly goods to a level of relative modesty and simplicity, which would mean treating nature and its resources with more care. The consumption of worldly goods will now always be put in a social and ecological context, where the environmental compatibility of one’s consumer habits is brought in connection with the welfare of the entire system. We will then, for example, buy groceries that have not been brought here at a stupendous cost of energy and resources from the remotest places in the world. Also, we will no longer buy clothes made by children under appalling working conditions for a pittance.

                

As it is no longer our own neediness that motivates us, which it used to be in the days of greed, it is now possible to see the broader picture with every single move we make as consumer. What is the effect this act will take in the world? we will ask ourselves, What ideals does it support or betray? If it benefits the whole system, it will be easy for us to refrain from satisfying a desire.

Hence, it will in fact be more conducive to one’s personal well-being to forego the purchase of a luxurious product leaving a catastrophic ecological footprint, or to opt for a means of transport that is more inconvenient but less harmful to the environment.

Relinquishment will lose the bitter aftertaste it picked up in our childhood. As children we were quite defenceless against our own wishes and desires, interpreting every act of denial from the grown-ups as insulting and disrespectful. Now, in adulthood, the more moments of successful relinquishment we accumulate, the more pleasing such moments will become for us. There is an important criterion for determining whether putting aside a certain wish is the right idea and does not result from subjugation to a feeling of guilt: do we feel more free and open if we relinquish than if we satisfy the need in question? This is part of the ancient tradition of fasting – overcoming a transient craving in order to experience greater freedom. 

(Translation: Michael Ehrmann)