LostEquation
2004-10-03, 06:33
It is quite interesting how the Christian faith (notably for this purpose the Protestant denominations) has been transformed over the centuries in order to justify various economic and political systems. By this, I don't mean simply a group of people forcing their own religious views on others or working to assimilate them into a particular cultural ideal, but rather the systematic inculcation of an idea into a society to the point that when one is being referred to, the other is automatically seen as synonymous or inherently related.
In regards to Western tradition, Christianity has become both an end and a means. It is used as a means in order to morally justify the workings of a capitalist society, while at the same time being used to represent the ideal version of humanity which capitalism helps to foster in each individual.
It is apparent why this connection had to be made during the early stages of industrial development. Medieval Catholic doctrine had taught a complacent lesson in regards to social mobility. Essentially that kings were kings because they were ordained by God, and that peasants were peasants because they too were 'ordained' by God to be such. As we all know, capitalism is a system which emphasizes the individual and his right to social mobility. Rather early capitalist theorists sought to prove that the ability to be socially mobile is present in each individual by virtue of God, rather than their social position by virtue of God.
It also became apparent during the early stages of industrial development that one's drive to "truck, barter and trade" needed a more concrete philosophical foundation rather than simply an empirical observation. The vast inequities which would inevitably occur needed a moral justification. Smith tried to tackle this problem by equating morality to an inherent human ability to sympathize with his fellow men and their plights. Although obviously oversimplified above, this notion basically placed trust in God that he who had would see to it that those who didn't survived. And that is essentially it, survived. Although much more euphemistically described in Theory of Moral Sentiments, the moral philosophy backing up capitalism still treated humans as resources of production, sustained only to further perpetuate the system.
All of this eventually became inculcated into the capitalist culture of the 19th and early 20th century in both Europe and the uS under the titles of "Protestant Ethic" or "rugged individualism," etc. In both Europe and America, the imperialist expansion present during these times further romanticized the idea of 'pulling oneself up by the bootstraps' or the 'self-made man,' and cemented these ideas in the Western psyche. In terms of colonialism, not only was the economic duty of a Christian man being exercised through industry, but also his Christian duty through the conversion of natives and what not.
Essentially, the Christian faith was interpreted in such a way that placed material success on par with spiritual virtue. By accumulating, even at the expense of others, one was fulfilling his God-given drive to 'truck barter and trade' while at the same time allowing others the ability to do so through the exchange of his labor for sustinence. Robber barons and industry tycoons, with little or no respect for human life, were viewed as the epitomy of Christian virtue. Ironically, those with the least scruples and moral convictions were usually the most likely to rise to the top. It would seem that the self-centeredness of capitalism would inherently conflict with the selflessness of Christianity. Smith attempted to reconcile this but failed, in my opinion.
Yet why does it still continue? Why is capitalism and material gain, or even mere individualism still so closely linked to Christian virtue? Anyone have any input?
In regards to Western tradition, Christianity has become both an end and a means. It is used as a means in order to morally justify the workings of a capitalist society, while at the same time being used to represent the ideal version of humanity which capitalism helps to foster in each individual.
It is apparent why this connection had to be made during the early stages of industrial development. Medieval Catholic doctrine had taught a complacent lesson in regards to social mobility. Essentially that kings were kings because they were ordained by God, and that peasants were peasants because they too were 'ordained' by God to be such. As we all know, capitalism is a system which emphasizes the individual and his right to social mobility. Rather early capitalist theorists sought to prove that the ability to be socially mobile is present in each individual by virtue of God, rather than their social position by virtue of God.
It also became apparent during the early stages of industrial development that one's drive to "truck, barter and trade" needed a more concrete philosophical foundation rather than simply an empirical observation. The vast inequities which would inevitably occur needed a moral justification. Smith tried to tackle this problem by equating morality to an inherent human ability to sympathize with his fellow men and their plights. Although obviously oversimplified above, this notion basically placed trust in God that he who had would see to it that those who didn't survived. And that is essentially it, survived. Although much more euphemistically described in Theory of Moral Sentiments, the moral philosophy backing up capitalism still treated humans as resources of production, sustained only to further perpetuate the system.
All of this eventually became inculcated into the capitalist culture of the 19th and early 20th century in both Europe and the uS under the titles of "Protestant Ethic" or "rugged individualism," etc. In both Europe and America, the imperialist expansion present during these times further romanticized the idea of 'pulling oneself up by the bootstraps' or the 'self-made man,' and cemented these ideas in the Western psyche. In terms of colonialism, not only was the economic duty of a Christian man being exercised through industry, but also his Christian duty through the conversion of natives and what not.
Essentially, the Christian faith was interpreted in such a way that placed material success on par with spiritual virtue. By accumulating, even at the expense of others, one was fulfilling his God-given drive to 'truck barter and trade' while at the same time allowing others the ability to do so through the exchange of his labor for sustinence. Robber barons and industry tycoons, with little or no respect for human life, were viewed as the epitomy of Christian virtue. Ironically, those with the least scruples and moral convictions were usually the most likely to rise to the top. It would seem that the self-centeredness of capitalism would inherently conflict with the selflessness of Christianity. Smith attempted to reconcile this but failed, in my opinion.
Yet why does it still continue? Why is capitalism and material gain, or even mere individualism still so closely linked to Christian virtue? Anyone have any input?