SHORT ESSAY: CHRIST VERSUS CAPITALISM

9/13/12

Paul Krugman writes today that the high concentration of income at the top undermines the values that define America.  Really?  There are two versions of the "American Dream" that define our political values.  The Materialistic aspect says that if you work hard and play by the rules you'll make it in America.  America is a land of opportunity for all and if you don't succeed it's your own fault.  It's the rags to riches Heratio Alger myth.

The other version of the dream is the Idealistic version:  America is a land of opportunity, yes, but we're all in this thing together and should lend one another a helping hand.  We should promote the general welfare through government.  We should collectively seek to create a level playing field.

In a way, it's Christ versus Capitalism.  Or, the values of materialism, competition, rugged individualism, dog eat dog, verses the values of loving thy neighbor, equality of opportunity, compassion, caring, empathy, and, particularly, taking care of the needs of"the least amongst us."

Krugman argues that inherited privilege is crowding out equality of opportunity. Yes, high concentration of income and inherited privilege undermine the foundations of our democracy if one believes in the Idealistic version of the American Dream.  But many Americans don't like that version. In part this is because they believe the wealth has its privileges.  If a person or a family is part of the 1% it's because they've earned it. 

It is true, as Krugman argues in his column, that only a tiny percentage of college graduates make it into this charmed circle.  But, advocates of the  materialistic dream would probably say they didn't study hard enough, really  pull themselves up by their academic bootstraps, majored in the wrong subject, etc.  In reality, college grads flipping burgers because of limited job opportunities is not in the reality of  Ayn Rand True Believers.

The Heratio Alger Believers  don't see things in terms of social, political, and economic forces being beyond individual control in a modern, inter-dependent, complex, global, increasingly mechanized society.  It's all really "I've got mine and I'll get yours if I can."  For them, each individual could be a king in our great land of opportunity and if he ends up a pauper (because he took bankruptcy over being unable to pay for his wife's cancer treatments) its just too bad, he should have exercised better foresight.

Krugman ends his column  saying that one of things we could do to level the playing fields for the rich and poor is to provide universal prekindergarten education.  I suppose materialistic dreamers, if they looked at the data, would have to acknowledge that these programs are highly successful in improving  K-12 results.  But these believers in the Heratio Alger (Ayn Rand) myth would probably  say "Show me in the Constitution where it says that I should pay my hard earned tax dollars to provide education for pre-school kids.  That's their parents responsibility, not mine."   "Taxes are already too high," they would probably complain.

So, if you're a True Believer in  the Materialistic version of the American Dream, what Krugman says about undermining American values won't make too much sense.