Today’s
global economy is heavily influenced by neo-liberalistic doctrines,
which developed during the 1970s and became increasingly prominent
during the 1980s. Neoliberalists criticise government inventions in the
economy and claim that the net gains of global free markets and
capitalism will outweigh their costs in almost all cases.
Unquestionably, global free trade and globalization has grown
over the last decades, but as Kofi Annan pointed out in his Millenium
Report, the benefits and opportunities of globalization remain highly
concentrated among a relatively small number of countries, and that
globalization can bring on economic instability and social dislocation
at lighting speed. In this essay I will try to highlight a Buddhist’s
stance towards globalization in the following three spheres: global
production, global consumption and global lifestyles.
Global Production:
Multinational corporations no longer choose their venues to serve local
markets alone, but move their bases to locations from which the global
market can be served best. In the end, the decision often becomes a race
to the bottom for prospective production sites, as costs have to be
minimized and labour flexibility maximised. The products themselves have
to bring satisfaction to the global consumer, not a satisfaction at
having enhanced the quality of the consumer’s life. From a Buddhist
point of view, everything about this line of thought is wrong and
uneconomic. The working conditions of the workforce are almost criminal,
as a sharp line between work and leisure will be drawn for those working
as mechanical slaves in the factories. Machines replace tools, and for
the worker the chance to utilize and develop his abilities at work are
destroyed. There is no common task among the workers, and if there is,
it is at best artificial. Production for a global market is highly
uneconomic, as self-sufficient local communities are worth thriving for.
The fact that Metro New World sells three imported German beers at
horrendous prices might result in a wide choice for the consumer, but
allows choices lacking any kind of ethical reflection and loaded with
bad kamma. The aim of global production, wealth, is justifiable. But
wealth should not be too important or
hoarded and has to be used for constructive purposes.
Global Consumption:
Material comfort can create happiness, but is of a secondary nature to
the development of human potential. Right Livelihood, as one factor on
the Noble Eightfold Path, consists of food, clothing, shelter and
medicine. Various degrees of material dependence exist among humans, and
as long as one’s livelihood does not exploit others, wealth is not
condemned. Global production does just this, and also contradicts
simplicity and non-violence. Patters of consumption continuously
deteriorate, the more global consumption and overconsumption become
commonplace. Also, consumption in neoliberalistic markets is not aimed
at personal well-being, but merely at satisfaction, thus wrong. The
concept of moderation is also missing from the open-ended economic
activity of globalization, and the right amount of consumption is
disregarded as most decisions of consumption lack reflection of their
true purpose.
Global Lifestyles:
The spread of neoliberalistic doctrines coincidences with a spread of
uneconomic lifestyles. Humans, especially mothers of young children,
have to work as they crave for the enjoyment of pleasurable things, and
cannot liberate themselves and proceed on their path to salvation. A
modest use of resources is discarded and work is separated from
satisfaction and merely the path to consumption. The natural
consequences of all actions and work become secondary to artificial
consequences, such as money. The attitude towards work is filled with
apathy, laziness and poor workmanship, as work is no longer a
complementary part of a living process involving work and leisure.
Personal well-being is widely ignored or even violated through
unreflected consumption or overconsumption, and the absurd craving for
material possessions can contradict the aim of non-violence as criminal
activity can result.
Conclusion:
Based on an analysis of global production, consumption and lifestyles it
is obvious that today’s economical world affairs would look different
if Buddhism had been the world’s major religion centuries ago, when
Calvinist traditions led to the rise and development of today’s
economic world affairs. Nevertheless, Buddhists can try to aim at a
middle way and incorporate many of the concepts or technologies of
globalization into their societies. The result could be a more locally
oriented capitalism based on moderation, simplicity and non-violence,
which could greatly enhance the well-being of its society.
|