Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
How defending capitalism is like recycling
How defending capitalism is like recycling
Mar 18, 2025 1:18 PM

Each week my neighbors and I engage in a curious ethical ritual. On Wednesday morning before we leave for work we set outside our doors an artifact that expresses our obligation to the welfare of future generations. We call these objects recycling bins.

Recycling is one example of an action that we take in the present to benefit a group in the future. The earth has enough space and resources that all current generations could be extremely wasteful without having a noticeably detrimental effect on the global population. Future generations, however, would likely suffer if we were wantonly careless in our use of resources. For this reason the recycling of waste products is viewed as an important, albeit minor, act of personal virtue.

Although most people probably do not need to be persuaded that we have moral obligations to future generations, it would be useful to examine what form such an argument would take. Philosopher Jim Nolt outlines it as follows:

1. We have obligations to all currently living people.

2. Future people are in no morally relevant respect different from currently living people.

3. We have obligations to all future people.

To the argument Nolt adds:

The moral irrelevance of time of birth is perhaps best understood by the realization that we are future people—to our predecessors. The distinction between past and future is, after all, not ultimate and absolute, but relative to temporal perspective. In that respect, it is like the designation, “foreigner,” which is relative to geographical perspective. Who counts as a foreigner depends on the country we inhabit. Likewise, who counts as a future person depends on the time we inhabit. All people are foreigners to people of countries other than their own. Likewise, all people belong to the future generations of their predecessors. [emphasis in original]

If this argument is true, then we have obligations (e.g., don’t despoil the planet) to future groups (e.g., people living in AD 2056). Many of us believe environmental stewardship is one of this class of obligations. Could defending free enterprise (i.e., capitalism) be another? As Arnold Kling argues,

One of the more under-appreciated arguments in favor of capitalism is that future generations ought to be counted as winners. That is, regardless of the proportion of winners and losers from capitalism in America in say, 1800, economic growth since then has made winners out of modern Americans. The dynamics of capitalism are such that, looking forward a few generations, the proportion of winners from economic growth approaches 100 percent, and the proportion of losers approaches zero. That is, economic growth will make nearly everyone will be better off several generations from pared to where they would be without any economic growth.

Imagine if we were to travel back in time to America in 1848 and had a discussion about the benefits of the free market system with a proponent of “scientific socialism.” If we were to exclude future generations from consideration, the socialists might be able to make a stronger case for why under their economic system there may be more current winners than losers. But by that same reasoning, we could claim panies in the mid-1800s who were dumping toxic chemicals into rivers and streams were creating more winners (i.e., industrialists and their workers) than losers, since the effects of the pollution would mostly impact people who were not yet born.

Similarly, if we only look at the people who are currently alive when we attempt to determine who wins/loses under capitalism, we overlook the largest group that will benefit the most: future generations.

This does not mean, of course, that we should discount the negative effect on the people who currently lose out in a free enterprise system. We can’t ignore the neighbors who exist today solely to benefit our neighbors who will exist in the future. But when considering the effects of an economic system, we ought toconsider how it affects all people—both the living and those who will liveafter we are gone.

If we believe we have an obligation torecycle our soda cans to help future people, we should recognize we have an even greater obligation to preserve and pass on an economic system that will make them better off.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Should We Tax Volunteer Work for Charities?
During the debate about how to resolve the fiscal cliff crisis, lawmakers on both sides have considered reducing the charitable tax deduction. That strikes many people as the wrong approach (especially those of us who work for non-profits!) even though we may not be able to explain why it’s such a bad idea. Fortunately, John Carney has provided a superb explanation for why reducing or removing this deduction is counterproductive. For instance, changing the charitable deduction as Carney notes, has...
Economics is Too Important to be Left to Economists
I rather like Serene Jones’ piece in Huffington Post, “Economists and Innkeepers.” Jones got some things right. She knows that Christian Scripture teaches many economic lessons, like subsidiarity and stewardship (although she doesn’t use those terms.) She says, “Economic theory is replete with theological and moral assumptions about human nature and society” and that is correct. As Istituto Acton’s Kishore Jayabalan reminds us, Things like the rule of law, a tradition of equality for the law, which should cut down...
When I Grow Up
“What do you want to be when you grow up?” That’s mon question asked of children the world over. ChildFund International has put out their global survey of children for 2012, and that’s one of the questions they asked, with some intriguing results. When asked, “If you could grow up to be anything you wanted, what would you be?” there were some rather remarkable disparities between the answers of children in the developed and the developing world. Kids in the...
Something Vastly More Powerful Than Evil
In his latest Forbes column, Rev. Robert A. Sirico explains why despite the tragedy in Newton we can speak of joy during this Christmas season: When we ask our bewilderedwhy? –we are not looking for data points.Even less should we offer glib responses in the face of this shattering loss – this modern-day slaughter of the innocents. We are, instead, seeking themeaningin the face of thismysterium iniquitatis.The meaning we seek is not so much the significance of evil as the...
Social Engineering Makes For Poor Economic Policy
Writing over at The Atlantic, American Enterprise Institute scholar Christina Hoff Sommers shares the unsettling story of what a growing number of Swedish activist groups and political factions are attempting to do to “traditional” gender roles. Is it discriminatory and degrading for toy catalogs to show girls playing with tea sets and boys with Nerf guns? A Swedish regulatory group says yes. The Reklamombudsmannen (RO) has reprimanded Top-Toy, a licensee of Toys”R”Us and one of the largest panies in Northern...
Free Kindle Ebook: ‘A Field Guide to the Hero’s Journey’
Acton is offering a free Christmas gift: a free Kindle download of the new book, A Field Guide to the Hero’s Journey. The book, co-authored by Jeff Sandefer and Rev. Robert Sirico, has been called a “the modern ‘how-to’ for entrepreneurs working on plishing big things” by Andreas Widmer, and is a terrific book not only for adults but for young people. You can also listen to the authors discussing their collaboration on this book on this Radio Free Acton...
How Should Christians View Property?
Étienne Cabet, a French philosopher and founder of a utopian socialist movement, once said: “Communism is Christianity.” The concept of property has existed longer than Western Civilization; trying to understand what property is and who can claim it has been an important issue for centuries. But, what is the Christian view of private property and ownership? Cabet, and others who believe that Christianity supports the concept munism or socialism, base their opinion on one particular passage of Scripture. In Acts:...
Why Christians in Business Should Read Poetry
Writing for the Harvard Business Review, my friend (and coauthor) John Coleman argues that business professionals can benefit from reading poetry. While his article is not directed at people of faith, I think his claims are particularly relevant to Christians in the business world: Poetry can also help users develop a more acute sense of empathy. In the poem “Celestial Music,” for example, Louise Glück explores her feelings on heaven and mortality by seeing the issue through the eyes of...
Conservation and Entrepreneurial Environmentalism
I found this profile of Mark Tercek, the former Goldman Sachs managing director who was tapped to head the Nature Conservancy, raises some profound issues concerning the relationship between economics and the environment: Tercek, 55, e to the Conservancy to fight financial brush fires. With the help of his board and the input of the Conservancy’s 600 scientists, he wants to remake the face of the American and global environmental movements. He has no quarrel with the current model—largely built...
Court: Justice Dept. Can’t Just Say ‘Trust Us, Changes Are Coming’
“There is no, ‘Trust us, changes ing’ clause in the Constitution,” wrote Judge Brian Cogan in his ruling issued two weeks ago against a Justice Department motion to dismiss the Archdiocese of New York’s lawsuit against the HHS mandate. “To the contrary, the Bill of Rights itself, and the First Amendment in particular, reflect a degree of skepticism towards governmental self-restraint and self-correction.” More federal judges ing to the same conclusion. Earlier this week a federal appeals court in Washington,...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved