THE JOY OF LIFE
139
economy supports the principle of development by freeing people to pursue a
range of creative and intellectual developmental desires.
In contrast, a capitalist market economy reduces mutualism, social
differentiation,
and
development.
Based
owner/worker and consumer/producer,
on
social
relationships
of
capitalism counters principles of
mutualism and differentiation, supporting instead a simple system of command
and control. For example, within an increasingly ‘global’ capitalist economy, a
handful of transnational corporations autocratically determine what shall be
produced, by whom, and at what cost for people and eco-communities
throughout the world. Rather than local communities participating in a
decentralized way, determining their own needs and desires in a spirit of
mutualism and social complexity, the corporation determines, through market
research and media manipulation, what ‘consumers’ will buy, centralizing the
power and resources that determine the social and ecological fate of the many.
Capitalism counters the principle of development by reducing members of a
community to ‘consumers’ and ‘workers’ whose labor and Eyes are marked by
degrees of alienation. Deprived of the ability to develop rich social and
ecological networks based on inter-dependence and mutual aid, people are
reduced to buyer and seller as the natural world is stripped and sold, reversing
the developmental trend toward biological complexity.
Having looked briefly at the examples above, we may now assert that it
is
objectively true that the social relationships surrounding participatory
democracy and a moral economy are more likely to enhance the evolutionary
tendencies toward mutualism, differentiation, and development than are the
social relationships surrounding a state-run democracy and a
capitalist
economy. And when we say that it is objectively true, we mean that it is not
relative, arbitrary, or a matter of personal opinion.
If as we have shown, ‘nature’ is a natural history, a process of organic
development marked by a trend toward increasing complexity and freedom,
then a social desire for nature implies a desire to play a creative role in
furthering this trend. It is indeed irrational to reverse the natural and social
complexity that has emerged throughout natural history. It is ‘irrational’ for
those in power to make most of the earth’s population unfree, to simplify
social relationships to ‘top-down’ and ‘command and control’ characteristic of
centralized and hierarchical structures. It is irrational to lull individuals and
communities into mass conformity and expedience, coercing them to embrace
a simple ‘blind faith’, or an ‘unquestionable authority’. Finally, it is irrational to
\mdo’ the rich complexity of social and eco-communities that evolved over
thousands of years, giving way to degrees of increasing flexibility, creativity,
stability, and complexity.