Capitalism and Progress: A Diagnosis of Western Society

by Bob Goudzwaard

English, Dutch (translation)

Genres: Economics, History, Nonfiction, Politics, Theology

304 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1979

Reviews

[Drew Norwood · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a disquieting book, but no doubt an important one. I expect I will be thinking over its contents for a while. The subtitle is: "a diagnosis of Western society" and, while his diagnosis seems to be spot on, it does not look good. Goudzwaard sketches the foundations of our current dilemma and traces the ills back to a "faith in progress" which we have made our central social concern. His position can be briefly explained by the analogy of cycling which he offers near the center of the book: "As long as the cyclist maintains his speed he remains balanced on his saddle. But if he tries to stop, he loses his balance. Similarly, the western economy is only in balance as long as economic progress persists, as long as a growing market for its products is present. If the tempo of economic growth declines only slightly, however, then a threat to the internal stability of society emerges. No stability exists other than the one based on progress. Every part of the social system is directed and geared to this stability."

Here is my attempt at a skeletal outline (taken largely from the chapter and section divisions within the book but omitting some):

1. RAZING THE BARRIERS AND UNLEASHING "PROGRESS"
1A [Social Order and Culture]. Goudzwaard first walks through the “barriers” of the older economic and social order, which placed limits on production and consumption, technique and science. In short, he posits that social order is an expression of culture.

1B [Barrier of Church and Providence]. The medieval order eventually gave way to capitalism, which was largely a result of the Renaissance. This new order prioritizes man and his material prosperity. Man is thought to be the sum of all things and is the master of his own destiny. Alognside this shift, "[l]abor, land, and capital became separate elements of production, each of which could be bought or hired by mean of money." As a result, the ends which are essential to judging the proper use of technology, science, and the efficient production of goods and services were reordered.

1C [Barrier of Fate and Providence]. Goudzwaard cites the waning influence of Augustine and the waxing influence of Deism. Adam Smith’s own religious views were not "purely a coincidence. It was precisely in the spiritual climate provided by deism, which looked upon the social and economic life of man as a cosmos controlled by natural laws and completely accessible to human analysis, that the science of economics could gradually emerge." He summarizes the four main elements of the classical economic view: (1) Man's relationship to things, rather than God and his fellow man is made preeminent--"human labor is not regarded first of all as a reciprocal human relation and an expression of communal action, but rather as an individual effort to be performed by means of a particular combination of labor, land, and capital. Labor is an isolated production factor to be put to use at random."; (2) Natural law is made into suitable servant; "just price" became whatever the market says it is; (3) Equilibrium becomes an economic harmony that comes through the free market; (4) a utilitarian ethics takes over, in which "the pursuit of the greatest possible possession of goods at the expense of the least possible exertion of labor is declared to be an a priori ethically proper matter."

1D [Barrier of the Lost Paradise]. Instead of seeing man as fallen and thus in need to superhuman grace, and instead of seeing perfection as coming only in the world to come, the Enlgihtenment philosophies bulldozed this barrier and sought to establish a paradise through ordering society properly. This belief in an attainable earthly paraidse fueled the ideologies of Revolution of the time, which were marked by three common threads: (1) the "general assumption that man by nature is not evil but good, and that consequently the evil that does exist in the world should not be attributed to man himself but to the social order and its structures which force him to do wrong"; (2) "the most dangerous enemies of man and his happiness are those persons who have identified themselves with the existing social order who make every effort to preserve it"; and (3) The conclusion then: "the enemy of the people must be eliminated, no matter how painful the elimination, since salvation can. break through in society only if this barrier is removed."

2. EVOLUTION OF MODERN CAPITALISM
2A [The Industrial Revolution and Its Consequences]. With the industrial revolution, the means of production underwent a seismic shift. Industrialism can best be represented by the factory or industrial enterprise, whereas the medieval order was best represented by the manor, church, and guild.

2B [The Socialist Countermovment]. Marx and Engels sought to address the alienation that resulted from the new industrialism. "Marx's faith in the advance of technology, his limited perspective on the sources of human alienation, and his profound confidence in the perfectibility of man through his laboring struggle with nature are elements of Marx's thought that can only lead to the conclusion that Marxism and capitalism are like sisters who live in hatred and envy toward one another. Both are direct descendants of Enlightenment faith in progress. For both, industrial expansion is the guide to a happier future, the hallmark of the arrival of better times."

2C [The unfolding of Faith in Progress after 1850]. This period marks the shift from paradisaical ideas to concrete programs. "[D]uring the second half of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth we witnessed a transition from the duty to effectuate desired progress to the duty to adapt to existing progress present in all its concrete manifestations."

2D [Changes within Capitalism Since 1850]. There are two majorly changes to track. First, changes within the business organizations themselves, which boil down to: (1) their size (small to large), legal structure (rise of limited liability), and mass production; (2) internalization of science, management, and technology (the entrepreneur/owner generally replaced by boards and "management" teams; separation of authority from ownership; and growth of separate internal departments); and (3) the assurance of continuing technological innovation as a means of successful business operations.

The second change was seen in the market environment. Goudzwaard sees four phases of "capitalism." First, the ideal of pure and perfect competition seemed to have been realized early on. But completion "tends toward its own elimination," which led to the second phase: the Robber Baron phase. "[T]he entrepreneurs became shrewd strategists . . .[who] set out to surprise their competitors by means of unexpected attacks, after which they withdrew to their fortresses with the spoils." The next phase was marked by voluntary cooperation: "businessmen began to realize that more profit and certainty could be attained through mutual cooperation and agreement than by means of surprise tactics and cutthroat competition." This phase saw the rise of trusts and cartels to ensure stability, but it also saw the passing of significant anti-trust legislation which had limited impact. The fourth and final phase is "oligopoly, innovation, and advertising. . . Competition in branches of industry in which a few large corporations control at least half of the total production is essentially different from competition in branches in which production is distributed more or less equally over a large number of corporations." Competition continues, but it does not take place in the field of prices and products, as before. Instead "[i]t is continued with equal intensity in two different areas, that is, technology and consumer tastes [advertising]."

3. DISAPPOINTMENTS OF PROGRESS
3A [Vulnerability of the Environment]. "Can the finite earth upon which we live tolerate in the long-run the strain of our unbridled progress? . . . The rich western countries have enormous technological and economic power. They are first both in scientific ability and in the strength of their defense. However, it is precisely as a result of this progress that they have become more and more vulnerable. Their capacity is phenomenal, but they cannot accomplish anything without a guaranteed supply of raw materials and energy. This powerlessness of the industrially advanced nations may well determine the political future of the world more decisively than their power has done until now."

3B [Vulnerability of the System]. "Certain problems of economic policy, such as unemployment and inflation, now seem quite unsolvable." The image of the cyclist is employed here. These vulnerabilities are very evident here in 2021.

3C [Vulnerability of Western Man]. "[W]estern man, at least in part, has indeed become the adjusted man, the person fitted into the mold prescribed by progress." And this adjustment has caused a diminishment in both work life and leisure time.

3D [The Dialectic of Progress]. We have made material prosperity our god and master. And "[o]ne cannot choose one's own masters in life without accepting the status of servant."

4. TOWARDS THE DISCLOSURE OF SOCIETY
4A [No Easy Way Out]. We are approaching closer and closer to a closed society (one in which all our organizations and norms are funneled toward one overarching, concrete goal) with its destination set for material progress. Goudzwaard compares the closed society to a spaceship, where all the parts and energies are directed toward a single purpose. In order to adjust our course, we must first seek "disclosure" which would mean: (1) "a process in which the norms for human life--like justice, trust, and truth—regain their original validity for our decisions and acts"; (2) "cultural institutions and societal forms—like governments, trade unions, and economic enterprises—regain opportunities to develop themselves according to their own distinct responsibilities"; and (3) it would "remove[] the unbridled pressure on the individual person to adjust his or her habits and behavior to external demands"

4B [Paradise Lost Revisited]. Conditions necessary for the disclosure of society in this realm--which, remember, replaced a view of fallen humanity with the optimism of social reforms and human perfectability to material prosperity: (1) call into question the "claim of economic, technical, and scientific progress to be its own justification"; and (2) require these forces (economic, technical, and scientific) to "relinquish their role as the ultimate standards of society." What would this look like? The disclosed society's "first concerns will be man's responsibility to protect and respect nature, the meaning of human labor, the human dignity of the consumer, and the opportunities for development of the poor nations; and to preserve for posterity sufficient energy and other natural resources."

4C [Barrier of Fate and Providence Revisited]. The razing of this particular barrier replaced natural law with a diminished counterpart and sought to throw off the limitations of creatureliness. Therefore, to seek better ground, we will need to re-establish norms and natural law. For objective, universal norms must be accepted if we are to be free: "norms are nothing more, nor less, than guidelines and avenues of response to God and neighbor. For that reason we can ignore norms only to our own detriment, for without this dimension of response our life and society in this created world run amok. Norms are not intended to rob us of our freedom; rather, they enable us to retain life and liberty, to prevent us from threatening the lives of ourselves and others."

Here we see three norms that have been abandoned and must be recovered: the norm of economy, the norm of technology, and the norm of morality and justice. First, the economic norm: "In classical antiquity two distinct Greek words were used to describe human economic activity: oikonomia and chrematistike. Oikonomia (the origin of our word economics) designated the behavior of the steward whose task it was to manage the estate entrusted to him in such a way that it would continue to bear fruit and thus provide a living for everyone who lived and worked on it. Central to this concept, therefore, was the maintenance of productive possessions on behalf of everyone involved. Chrematistike, however, meant something quite different. This word expressed the pursuit of self-enrichment, for ever greater monetary possessions, if need be at the expense of others. It is remarkable to observe that in western civilization the meaning of the word economics has increasingly become synonymous with chrematistike, while progressively it lost the meaning of oikonomia, the careful maintenance as steward on behalf of others of all that is entrusted to man. . . Business enterprises, in other words, should be genuinely economic organizations, that is, institutions of stewardship."

Second, technological norms: Our current perverted norm operates on the assumption that if the technology works, then it should be employed. Instead, we need to question the humanity of the new technology. The technology should be humane--both in scale and in its social nature (avoiding the push toward isolating of humans from each other).

Third, the norm of morality and justice. The norm has been perverted by the objectification of people, both as consumers and employees. "Consumers are made into objects when they are manipulated by marketing techniques as just so many bundles of psychic impressions and motivations. The mark of objectification is that people are no longer treated as bearers of responsibilities. A business enterprise, for example, treats a consumer as an object when it no longer appeals to his sense of responsibility, but instead attempts to overrule or manipulate his choice." And "[e]mployees, similarly, can be reduced to objects by the minimization or destruction of the possibility of making responsible choices of their own."

4D [Barrier of Church and Heaven Revisited]. The last proposal discussed corresponds to the first barrier razed (church and heaven). The Renaissance view of life must be addressed squarely, for"it is only by a fundamental disavowal of this utilitarian view of labor, norms, and happiness that a disclosure of society can be successful." Barriers are ignored at our own hazard. "If man and society ignore genuine norms, such as justice and restitution of rights, respect for life, love of neighbor, and stewardship, they are bound to experience the destructive effects of such neglect. That is not, therefore a mysterious fate which strikes us; rather, it is a judgment which and society bring upon themselves. This concrete, created world was designed by God for our exercise of justice, stewardship, and love of neighbor. That is why a negation of that stewardship leads to dreadful pollution in that same world, why a negation of the norm of justice leads to violence and terrorism, and why collective egoism leads to economic disruption such as unemployment and inflation. Genuine norms do not hang in the air. They are not the speculations of noble minds They give evidence of their validity, of being concretely in force. To ignore given norms out of an a priori illusion of autonomy only seems to afford freedom, but in the long run it removes genuine freedom." There can be two responses to God's judgment: (1) invitations to build an even more closed type of society, in which even more strict forms of governmental centralization hold, and in which science and technology occupy an even more dominant position." Or, (2) "the way of coming to our senses, the way of reflection and reassessment."

5. EPILOGUE.
"If this observation is correct, then we find ourselves at a very critical juncture in the development of western civilization. No society or civilization can continue to exist without having found an answer to the question of meaning. The emptiness created by the death of the god of progress must be filled with something else. But what will that be? It seems that we have two choices: either the vacuum will be filled by a new, aweinspiring myth, possibly built around the leaders of a central and large-scale world authority, who are authorized by their populations to direct all available technical, economic, and scientific means to new objectives with which to assault both heaven and earth; or else there will take place a turnaround of Christians and nonchristians together, a turnaround which directs itself to the Torah or normativity which the Creator of heaven and earth has given to this world as its meaning from the beginning, and which points forward to a new earth, coming with the return of the crucified One. Without such a turnaround I can hardly imagine a real and permanent disclosure of our western civilization. Therefore our deepest choice appears to lie between an enslaving autonomy and a liberating heteronomy, or, to put it another way, between restricting utopias and the inspiring openness of the biblical eschaton."

[Timon · Rating 5 out of 5]

dit boek stemt tot nadenken. in hoeverre vormen kapitalisme (met het utilitairisme als basis) en het geloof in vooruitgang uiteindelijk een giftige cocktail, die meer is dan wij kunnen dragen? vooral wanneer vooruitgang in kapitalistische termen wordt begrepen en mens en natuur niet meer dan productiemiddelen worden en vooruitgang niets meer is dan het produceren van steeds meer goederen. Kunnen wij (als personen, samenleving, natuur en aarde) dat dan nog aan?

En wat is er nodig om het gestelde doemscenario te voorkomen?

[Ardi Pierik · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dit boek van professor Goudzwaard is geschreven tegen kapitalistisch vooruitgangsgeloof, zoals de titel al zegt. Dit vooruitgangsgeloof kenmerkt zich door een natuurwetenschappelijke methode in de wetenschap, nutsdenken en techniek als puur toepassen van wetenschappelijke ontdekkingen.

De samenvatting
--------------------------

Het boek bestaat uit vier delen. In het eerste deel onderzoekt Goudzwaard welke culturele barrières uit de late middeleeuwen geslecht moesten worden om dit vooruitgangsgeloof mogelijk te maken. Hij noemt daarbij:
1) de barrière van het verloren paradijs. Volgens de vooruitgangsdenkers is het mogelijk om hier op aarde een paradijselijke toestand te creëren (platgeslagen tot een welvarende, luxueus levende samenleving).
2) de barrière van noodlot en voorzienigheid. De sturende en begrenzende voorzienigheid van God verandert in de 'onzichtbare hand' van Adam Smith. Hierdoor is er sprake van een soort deïsme. De voorzienigheid is immers een soort natuurwet geworden.
3) de barrière van kerk en hemel. De gerichtheid op God en Zijn komende Koninkrijk veranderde in een aardsgerichtheid.
Goudzwaards conclusie luidt: hier is sprake van een vooruitgangsgeloof, religieuze trekken dus.

Het tweede deel biedt een historische schets vanaf de Verlichting. Goudzwaard laat zien dat dit sturen op vooruitgangsgeloof als vanzelf leidt tot een grote overheid, omdat er steeds maar weer wordt verwacht om die vooruitgangsmachine gaande te houden. Niet alleen de kapitalistische vooruitgangsdenkers maken deze fout, ook de marxisten houden vol dat de mens door arbeid boven de natuur uit moet stijgen. Het resultaat is dat de hele samenleving meer en meer op het streven naar vooruitgang ingericht raakt.

Deel drie is een meer economische schets van de crisis van de vooruitgang. Goudzwaard noemt verschillende zaken, zoals oprakende grondstoffen, structurele werkloosheid (dit speelde breder in het Europa van zijn tijd, 1976), milieuschade en vervreemding van het arbeidsproces door verregaande arbeidsverdeling plus zinloos werk. De goden van het vooruitgangsgeloof hebben de mens volgens Goudzwaard in hun macht gekregen.

In het laatste deel gaat Goudzwaard op zoek naar oplossingen. Hij kan en wil nadrukkelijk geen blauwdruk geven, maar geeft wel een denkrichting mee. Het probleem is volgens hem dat economie, wetenschap en techniek als trechters in elkaar geschoven zijn. Dit leidt tot blikvernauwing. Goudzwaard wil deze trechters weer uit elkaar trekken, door de oude barrières in een moderner jasje te herstellen. Dit kan bijvoorbeeld door niet alleen te kijken naar economische opbrengsten van activiteiten , maar ook naar de waarde en gevolgen voor de samenleving. Je zou het een soort 'brede welvaart' kunnen noemen. Ook wil hij negatieve en positieve stimulansen invoeren, zoals Europese reductiepercentages per sector en een soort door de overheid gewaarborgde keurmerken. In de samenleving is daarnaast een mentaliteitsverandering nodig. Naast de meer maatschappelijke kant daarvan betekent dat ook een terugkeer naar God. Het is belangrijk om aanknopingspunten daarvoor te benutten.

De beoordeling
------------------------

Tijdens het lezen verbaasde ik me met enige regelmaat over de enorme belezenheid die er nodig is om een boek als dit te schrijven. Goudzwaard houdt zich in dit boek immers niet alleen bezig met economie en bijbehorende filosofie, maar treedt ook op historisch en theologisch terrein. Dat doet hij heel netjes, hoewel ik me bij het historische deel wel meer afvroeg of het niet meer een geschiedenis van de relevante filosofie was. In hoeverre het vooruitgangsgeloof de meeste mensen van voor 1750 heeft weten te bereiken, vraag ik me wel af. Dat neemt echter niet weg dat de relevantie van deze historisch-filosofische schets duidelijk uit het boek blijkt.

Wel denk ik dat Goudzwaard soms net wat te veel naar zero sum-denken neigt. Hij is weliswaar niet tegen alle vormen van groei, maar benadert het grondstoffenvraagstuk voor een belangrijk deel vanuit de eindigheid ervan. Daar zit wat in, maar anderzijds blijken er ook steeds weer nieuwe zaken als grondstof te kunnen worden aangeboord en biedt circulariteit mogelijkheden om de bestaande grondstoffen beter te benutten. Wellicht was dit vijftig jaar geleden minder voorspelbaar, maar daardoor heeft dat deel van het betoog wel iets aan relevantie ingeboet.

Het is grappig om te zien dat Goudzwaards Europese regulering door de jaren heen inderdaad heeft plaatsgevonden. Daarbij is men niet blijven steken bij de verboden en beprijzing die hij zelf onvoldoende diepgaand noemt, maar zijn er ook verplichte reductiepercentages (al dan niet per sector) opgenomen in Europese wetgeving. Tegelijkertijd is het wel belangrijk om daar maat in te houden. De aantasting van het concurrentievermogen lijkt nu ook de geopolitieke veiligheid te raken. Zomaar stoppen met economisch groeien of de groei vergaand belemmeren kan gevaarlijk zijn, zoals Goudzwaard zelf overigens ook toegeeft.

Tot slot: dit boek stelt me voor belangrijke en complexe vragen die ik moeilijk kan overzien. Terwijl ik nadacht over mogelijke politieke concretiseringen van Goudzwaards pleidooi, kwam het beleid rond hoger onderwijs bij mij op. Dat beleid staat inderdaad in vergaande mate in dienst van de blikvernauwing die Goudzwaard heeft beschreven. Het zou wenselijk zijn als de sturing op economisch nut, technische vooruitgang en de natuurwetenschappelijke methode daar losgelaten zou kunnen worden. Juist in de wetenschap is het belangrijk om ruimte te geven aan onderzoek dat misschien niet direct nuttig, maar wel van waarde is. Wetenschap is er misschien wel vooral om wijsheid te vergaren, en niet zozeer om meer welvaart en vooruitgang te creëren. Tot zover lijken de consequenties helder: zorg voor een fatsoenlijke financiering van (o.a.) de geesteswetenschappen, toets onderzoeksaanvragen minder op maatschappelijk nut en zorg voor minder massaliteit in het hoger onderwijs.

Aan de andere kant staat echter het rapport van Draghi over concurrentievermogen. Ook dat is een overtuigend betoog, waarin wordt geschetst dat Europa onvoldoende in staat is om innovatie te creëren en belangrijke industrie en bedrijven vast re houden. Op basis van Goudzwaards analyse zou dat op zich geen probleem hoeven zijn, ware het niet dat ook de veiligheid en geopolitieke onafhankelijk van Europa daarmee op het spel staan. In zijn oplossingen ziet Draghi ook een rol voor het onderwijs. De gevolgen daarvan zijn alleen nóg meer arbeidsmarktsturing, meer focus op nuttige nascholing, et cetera. Denkend vanuit Goudzwaard zou je daarom kunnen zeggen dat Draghi een nieuwe aanzet vormt om dit vooruitgangsgeloof in geopolitiek onzekere tijden vast te kunnen houden. De vraag is alleen of de twee verschillende lijnen beleidsmatig wel samen kunnen gaan, zeker in deze tijden van budgettaire krapte.

Mijn conclusie na het lezen van dit mooie boek is dat het ontzettend ingewikkeld is om op deze thema's te ontdekken wat wijsheid is.

[Jon Coutts · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an excellent analysis of the problematic premises and effects of capitalism, and a realistically hopeful suggestion of changes that could be sought to reform it. It sits nicely between Marx and MacIntyre, and feels like a precursor to Laudato Si.

[Jônathas Souza · Rating 4 out of 5]

Existe uma abordagem cristã para a economia? Essa é a pergunta que Bob Goudzwaard responde em sua brilhante obra, Capitalismo e Progresso, publicada nos anos 1970 na Holanda, e traduzida para o português na coleção Ciência e Fé Cristã da editora Ultimato. O trabalho parte da perspectiva neocalvinista de soberania divina sobre todas as coisas; assim, Deus tem a ver também como nos organizamos economicamente. E esse é um assunto que provoca muitas discussões e opiniões, geralmente nos levando a acreditar que é o caso de apenas “mudar o que está aí”. O livro demonstra que não se trata de um problema tão simples assim. Antes de qualquer estrutura ou expressões culturais, a forma de nos organizarmos reflete um compromisso profundo do coração. Em vez de apenas uma estrutura natural impessoal que ao longo dos séculos deu à luz o capitalismo, o que temos são corações profundamente comprometidos com a fé no progresso.

O autor passa a demonstrar quando e como esse compromisso tomou espaço no coração ocidental, e por que razão faz mais sentido pensar na fé no progresso como motivo principal para a estrutura capitalista moderna. Primeiramente, Goudzwaard apresenta como a Idade Média foi um terreno fértil para mudanças, especialmente no que diz respeito à Reforma e a um convite para que cada pessoa vivesse sua vida por completo coram deo. Isso significava que toda a atividade do ser humano, incluindo a econômica, tinha importância religiosa. Entretanto, Goudzwaard se apressa a defender que não podemos, como Weber, colocar todo o capitalismo na conta de uma ética protestante. Na verdade, o humanismo renascentista, com seu foco exacerbado no homem e suas potencialidades, foi o maior provedor de mudanças e de condições para que o espírito do capitalismo surgisse. O que restava era destruir determinadas barreiras que impedia o progresso (e consequentemente o capitalismo) a tomar conta da estrutura social.

Goudzwaard passa a apresentar que barreiras eram essas. Em primeiro lugar, temos a barreira da igreja e do céu. Em vez de uma orientação vertical da sociedade, marcada pelo controle da Igreja e da expectativa pelo céu, entra em cena o motivo-base da renascença, a saber, a emancipação do homem da estrutura vertical, que descobre o mundo e o lugar que tem nele, e as oportunidades dele mesmo construir autonomamente o seu mundo. E se o ser humano tem a possibilidade dele mesmo construir seu mundo, ele pode também tomar posse do seu destino. É aí que cai a segunda barreira, a do Destino e Providência. A doutrina da providência agostiniana condena a busca da felicidade pelo próprio esforço, colocando Deus como o provedor de todas as coisas. Em resposta, surge o deísmo, que reconhece Deus apenas como o criador, mas que deixa o ser humano à própria sorte; assim, construir seu futuro passa a ser papel crucial, e a natureza se torna o domínio da autorrealização do homem. O ser humano passa a agir em busca de seu próprio destino, e escolhe o que é “mais útil”, para si e para os outros; nesse caso, a ética e justiça servem e estão subordinadas ao progresso. Por fim, a centelha espiritual — a sociedade ocidental escolhe outro paraíso para si. O Iluminismo transforma a consciência do progresso nas ciências e expansões geográficas em fé nesse mesmo progresso, crendo que a vida humana seria cada vez melhor, a partir da engenhosidade humana. Um paraíso é projetado, onde a prosperidade material, abundância de prazer e a inexistência de um estado são pontos marcantes. O que falta agora é colocar em prática, e o Iluminismo e a fé no progresso se tornam a faísca e pólvora das revoluções sociais do final do século XVIII.

Na segunda parte do livro, o autor faz uma perspectiva histórica do capitalismo, demonstrando como a industrialização aproveitou todo o movimento e promoveu mudanças drásticas na estrutura societária. Pouco a pouco, a tecnologia empregada foi usada para aumentar a produtividade, e os trabalhadores são apenas ferramentas de produção de lucro ilimitado. O interessante é que a resposta socialista ao acúmulo de capital e desvalorização dos trabalhadores compreende a mesma agenda de progresso utópico que tem a tecnologia como ferramenta principal de mudança. Ao longo do tempo, cada vez mais a ciência, gestão e tecnologia são internalizadas nas próprias empresas, e servem apenas para aumento de produtividade (e consequentemente, lucro). As empresas passam por diversos momentos, desde concorrentes ferrenhas a um cenário de cooperação, e o governo passa de inimigo do livre mercado a um garantidor do funcionamento ideal do sistema capitalista, com suas intervenções e leis antitruste. Em resposta a esse cenário, talvez se esperasse que partidos políticos e movimentos trabalhistas cobrassem mudanças estruturais profundas, mas o que ocorre na prática é uma acomodação em buscar apenas antecipar aos trabalhadores os frutos desse progresso.

Na terceira parte da obra, Goudzwaard apresentam as vulnerabilidades desse sistema. Em primeiro lugar, se percebe a vulnerabilidade do ambiente. Um crescimento ilimitado não encaixa com um meio ambiente limitado, e a pressão por matéria-prima e energia acaba impactando negativamente a natureza, inclusive terceirizando as demandas para os países de terceiro mundo. Além disso, há uma vulnerabilidade inerente ao próprio sistema; em vez de um equilíbrio natural evolucionário, o que vemos é uma crescente intervenção para garantir pleno emprego e crescimento indefinido da demanda. Por fim, o próprio ser humano é vulnerável, por se ver pressionado a adaptar-se cada vez mais, vivendo de forma fragmentada e com toda a sua vida dedicada a produzir ininterruptamente.

Como resolver esta questão? Goudzwaard se propõe a responder essa pergunta na parte quatro do livro. Antes, apresenta as alternativas propostas por outras perspectivas, como a revolução de Marcuse, a fuga, a contracultura de Charles Reich e a revisão da sociedade (Galbraith) e/ou do homem (Gabor). Gabor, inclusive, é quem mata a charada: não há como ter um futuro diferente sem haver um novo ser humano. Entretanto, o que vemos é um compromisso renovado dessas perspectivas com o humanismo otimista, onde há uma esperança de resolver todas as coisas, bem como uma abertura para um autocontrole sistêmico, dando ainda mais espaço para a tecnologia como ferramenta de construção utópica. Ao fim, não restam muitas esperanças (e, no caso da revolução, nem alternativas são dadas).

A verdade é que “não há saída fácil” — o problema está arraigado nas próprias bases sociais. Vivemos em uma sociedade de túnel, onde todos os esforços e labores são voltados para progredirmos numa só direção. Se antes o progresso era visto como a solução para as vulnerabilidades acima mencionadas, agora se vê que os problemas não são apenas imunes ao progresso, como sintomas do mesmo. A solução passa, portanto, por construir uma sociedade aberta, que recupera as normas de justiça, confiança e verdade, que restaura as instituições para suas obrigações e resgata indivíduos da pressão pela adaptação. Para isso, Goudzwaard propõe revisitar as barreiras antes mencionadas. Para ele, essas barreiras não foram simplesmente quebradas, mas reajustadas para manter a fé no progresso ativa na sociedade ocidental contemporânea.

Em primeiro lugar, é necessário quebrar a expectativa de um paraíso construído pela engenhosidade humana, onde o único propósito da ciência, tecnologia e economia é o consumo. Goudzwaard propõe uma abertura de objetivos, onde a tecnologia é orientada para princípios com conteúdo normativo substancial. Essa normativa é a resposta do autor para a barreira do destino e providência. Em vez de ignorar quaisquer responsabilizações, ou de jogar todo o peso de regulamentação e fiscalização para o governo, é necessário reconhecer normas e estruturar a atividade econômica de forma responsável. Essa responsabilidade, inclusive, perpassa todos os membros dessa estrutura econômica, como empresas, gestores, consumidores e movimentos trabalhistas.

A obra de Goudzwaard é singular em diversos aspectos, e reorienta a discussão econômica para seu cerne mais íntimo. O autor não se propõe a dar um plano estruturado (até mesmo de forma pedagógica, por entender que isso é substituir um objetivo por outro). Entender que não se trata apenas de posições ideológicas, mas de compromissos profundos é crucial para empreender uma sociedade cada vez mais justa e orientada para seu fim máximo, que é glorificar a Deus. Dessa forma, poderemos proclamar na prática de que não há um só centavo em todo universo sobre o qual Cristo, que é soberano sobre tudo, não clame: “É meu”.

[Anderson Paz · Rating 5 out of 5]

Capitalismo e Progresso
Em sua obra recém publicada no Brasil, o economista holandês Bob Goudzwaard, começa falando como os fundamentos culturais e espirituais do medievo propiciaram um ambiente para o surgimento de um novo modelo de relações econômicas e sociais, a saber, o capitalismo. Já no cap. II, a partir da Renascença, também por influência da Reforma Protestante, o autor explica que se formou o capitalismo moderno, isto é, forças independentes e autônomas de crescimento econômico e tecnológico, baseadas na fé no progresso, expandiram o sistema baseado nas relações de produção capitalistas (p. 90).
Esse avanço (cap. III) teve a marca de secularizar a noção de providência divina ao se crer que o progresso, sob uma mão invisível, era um curso inevitável que dirigia as relações sociais adiante em um sistema fechado. O deísmo passou a ser predominante e tornou-se a última porta antes de a sociedade se tornar profundamente secular. No cap V., Goudzwaard argumenta que o Iluminismo fechou ainda mais a vida social e econômica ao divino, tornando lugar comum a fé no progresso, o racionalismo, e a crença na perfeição humana. Elementos esses que fundamentaram as revoluções que viriam a ocorrer.
Toda essa abertura, que o escritor entende como fechamento, propiciou que o capitalismo moderno se formasse. A Revolução Industrial (cap. VI), ampliou o sistema capitalista e desenvolveu suas consequências. Contra essa nova conjuntura, o movimento socialista bravejou (cap. VII). Nesse ponto, o autor aponta que o capitalismo e o marxismo são irmãos que se odeiam mas que cultivam a fé no progresso.
A partir de 1850, com a influência da crença positivista e evolucionista, a fé no progresso se aprofundou ainda mais, possibilitando que as empresas começassem a se formar como grandes conglomerados (caps. VIII e IX) e que partidos políticos e movimentos trabalhistas surgissem no cenário reivindicando direitos (cap. X).
Na terceira parte do livro, nos caps. XI a XV, o autor explica que a dialética do progresso que coloca em antítese irreconciliável a liberdade e a natureza mostrou sua vulnerabilidade como ambiente, como sistema e no assujeitamento do homem à máquina e a tecnologia.
Na parte final, nos caps. XVI a XXII, o economista holandês pontua algumas respostas inadequadas a esse cenário, faz críticas ao progresso autônomo, e propõe a abertura da sociedade. Esta sua proposta tem três aspectos (p. 201-202, e p. 225): a) que haja recuperação do significado e valor da vida humana fora da sujeição e serviço ao progresso, b) que instituições culturais e formas sociais possam se desenvolver conforme suas próprias responsabilidades distintas, c) e que haja a reintrodução da responsabilidade direta e plena no setor da produção da sociedade, sob normas de moralidade, justiça, tecnologia e economia.

[Joel Blunt · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good analysis of the linkage between the west's faith in progress and capitalism. However, his solution is impractical and ethnocentric.

[Dayo Adewoye · Rating 5 out of 5]

A profound historical analysis of the concept of Progress in Western society. It contains both a careful review and scholarly critique from a Christian perspective. It's a book worth reading.