The Western democratic-capitalist
system that is now extending its reach to every corner of the globe
is often presented, by its apologists, as a humanitarian advance over
earlier social systems1.
Unlike, for instance, the Hindu caste system or the European feudal
system, democratic-capitalism allows for the social mobility of
individuals. The (at least theoretic) ability of people to effect
their own social status is claimed to be a major advance in equality
over earlier systems of hereditary status determination.
However, our democratic-capitalist
system has more in common with the systems that it has replaced than
its proponents would like to admit. Let us take the Hindu caste
system as an example and see if we can't tease out some of these deep
similarities.
Traditionally, Hindu society was
divided into four castes2,
each with a particular role to fill in society. These castes are:
- Brahmin—the priestly caste, responsible for performing religious rituals and perpetuating religious thought.
- Kshatriya—the warrior and kingly caste, responsible for all military matters and for the administration/rule of society.
- Vaishya—originally farmers and cattle-raisers, but now normally associated with trade and money-lending
- Shudra—the working class; their traditional duty is described as serving the other three castes.
In our contemporary
democratic-capitalist system, we also have brahmins and kshatriyas,
vaishyas and shudras. The names have changed but much else has
remained the same. Our contemporary brahmins are the academics and
lawyers, those who are given the task of abstract thought and of
aligning human action with abstract principle (concepts of “justice”
and “equality” having taken the place of “divine will” and
statutory law replacing ritual and doctrinal texts). Our kshatriyas
are the political class: elected politicians and appointed
administrators of the civil service. Vaishyas have been replaced by
businessmen and women, bankers and financiers. And our equivalent of
the shudra caste, of course, is the working class; which is to say,
most of us.
Just
as in the old Hindu caste system, our present social system
prescribes and proscribes particular types of behavior for each class
of people. While the rules regarding what types of activity are
permitted to each social class are not made as explicit in our system
as they were in the old caste system, they are, nonetheless, there3.
Specifically, only
the top three groups are allowed to think. The bottom group, the
workers, are not permitted to think but only to act. Of course, this
proscription on thought is rarely spelled out so bluntly, but that is
message that is given over and over again by the media and society in
general: only the thinking of “experts” holds any weight.
Working
class people are not expected to have their own thoughts about
philosophic or academic topics; if anything, they are expected to
parrot the pronouncements of respectable academics and professional
intellectuals. In order for a person's intellectual pursuits and
conclusions to be taken seriously, they must have a string of fancy
letters behind their name. The plumber or baker who holds forth on
intellectual topics is roundly ignored, if not laughed out of the
room. Legitimacy is reserved for those of the intellectual, academic
class.
Working class people are also not
expected to have political ideas...unless, of course, they coincide
with the reigning ideology of respectable politicians4.
And working class people are definitely not encouraged to have ideas
about how to run a business or a bank. Only the managers and owners
of business enterprises are considered to be up to that task.
This is why the co-op movement,
therefore, poses an existential threat to the current system on
multiple levels. The co-op movement undermines academic economics by
placing cooperation instead competition at the heart of it's economic
model. It undermines the political class by expanding democracy and
democratic practice to everyday life, instead of confining it to
biannual elections, as the politicians would have us do (if people
experience real democracy at work, they might start demanding it in
other areas too!). And the co-op movement directly undermines
businesspeople by implementing alternative management and ownership
arrangements that eliminate the need for outside owners, investors
and managers.
The co-operative movement is the
working class daring to think for itself, and that thought has the
potential to upset many powerful vested interests. We shouldn't be
surprised, then, when the powers-that-be push back against this
dangerous idea. Witness the hamstringing of health insurance
co-operatives by Obamacare (as detailed in a recent Washington Post
article here)
as well as the current push in Congress to revoke credit unions'
tax-exempt status. When those at the bottom of society's hierarchy
begin to encroach on what have been the sole prerogatives of those
further up the ladder, those at the top can be expected to do
whatever they can to stop that encroachment.
Despite their best efforts, however,
the encroachment shall continue.
~~~
There is one other caste that we must
not forget to mention: the Dalits, or 'untouchables5.”
In India, until recently, these people were utterly shunned,
confined to live in slums and to perform only the most dirty and
demeaning work.
Our Dalits, our 'untouchables', are the
homeless. The homeless also are not allowed to think, to theorize,
to organize. They are there to remind us shudras that there is
always another rung further down the ladder that we could be pushed
to. They are there to make us grateful for our place in the scheme
of things, lowly though it may be. But just as the existence of an
'untouchable' caste is the shame of the Hindu caste system, and
evidence of its corruption and moral vacuity, so the existence of
homeless women and men, homeless children and homeless families is
the proof that our system is similarly corrupted and morally vacuous.
The caste system in
Hinduism has been officially abandoned, although it maintains its
hold on many minds. Similarly, our current democratic capitalist
system must also ultimately be abandoned. Abandoned for what? For a
society that places democracy and cooperation at the center of its
ideology and its daily life, instead of wealth accumulation and
competition.
1.
It might well be argued that our current social system is neither
democratic nor, strictly speaking, capitalist. However, lacking
better terminology I will refer in this essay to our present social
system by the misnomer favored by its proponents.
3.
That the pre- and proscriptions
for each class are not made explicit in our society only makes them
more pernicious, as they are harder to identify and therefore to
resist.
4.
Practically an oxymoron these days, it seems like.
5.
Historically, the Dalits are a
late addition to the caste system and are not mentioned in the
classical texts.