From: wolda002@umn.edu
Date: Tue Feb 24 2009 - 23:26:11 EST
http://www.truthout.org/022409A
Beyond Scarcity: Reinventing Wealth in a Progressive World
Tuesday 24 February 2009
by: Joe Brewer, t r u t h o u t | Perspective
photo
(Photo: signposts.org.au)
We are bound to make the world in our own image. So, we had better be sure 
we have the right values in mind as we think about ourselves in this 
historic transition.
    The current economic crisis is causing a massive redistribution of 
wealth across society. With a newfound capacity to shape our nation's 
destiny, progressives can take this opportunity to redefine ourselves - 
especially our ideas about wealth and prosperity - as we seek to build a 
flourishing society.
    It is often the case that people who dedicate their lives to the 
betterment of society are hindered by a particular obstacle - what I call 
the scarcity mindset.
    This mindset can be described in several ways:
  # The belief that a person has to compromise his or her values to make 
money.
  # Harboring an impoverished view of wealth as merely money or 
accumulation of material stuff - and seeking to avoid being identified with 
this activity.
  # A recurring feeling that there just aren't opportunities to do 
something meaningful and satisfying.
  # A cynical view of collaboration.
  # The belief that people who seek wealth are selfish or greedy.
    This mindset can be explained in several ways. One mechanism comes from 
the study of system justification, a theory developed by New York 
University psychologist Jon Jost. Jost observed that people in oppressed 
groups often internalize negative stereotypes that the dominant group 
perpetuates to justify its superiority. An example of such a stereotype is 
the "gangsta thug" that frames inner-city black young men as violent 
thieves who peddle drugs and guns. This stereotype has been internalized by 
many inner-city youth and reduces the aspirations and self-confidence 
necessary to engage them in the process of rebuilding their communities.
    Progressives are in a similar situation with our political views. 
Conservatives have set the terms of debate for decades, introducing their 
ways of thinking about government, markets, human nature, and yes, 
prosperity. Their view of prosperity should be familiar. Just think of the 
glorification of wealth in our media-saturated, celebrity-worship society 
and you'll get a solid impression. Conservatives typically view wealth as 
material accumulation within a rampant form of capitalism. A "good" 
business person exploits everything possible to increase the riches of his 
estate.
    This view of wealth is appalling to progressives. Our sentiments are 
motivated more by the empathetic bonds we feel with other people and the 
natural world. So, what happens when we recoil with disgust at this 
exemplar of selfishness and greed? A negative stereotype is introduced - 
that the progressive businessperson or political activist must oppose the 
accumulation of wealth. We must "take the moral high road" and sacrifice 
personal comforts for the sake of our communities. In short, we are to be 
ascetics, "hair shirts," hippies, low-wage teachers and social workers, and 
so on.
    We project this negative stereotype onto ourselves, thus defining our 
identities in opposition to that which we detest - the conservative elites' 
view of exploitation for personal gain. This is what one might call a 
"reactive trap," because the dynamic is one of reacting to the views of 
another group. What we need to do instead is empower ourselves with a 
proactive position on prosperity. More on this in a moment.
    Starving Our Own for the Greater Good
    These stereotypes are not merely internalized at a personal level. Our 
scarcity mindset has been built into many of our institutions, as we can 
see with progressive philanthropy and the hiring practices at nonprofits. 
The guiding principle of the progressive world is to starve our own for the 
greater good.
    While conservatives lavish young talent with communal supports and 
lucrative careers, we refuse to invest in our own. Progressive foundations 
are only willing to fund projects that are "accountable" and "cost 
effective" - understood as "accountable to higher authorities" (the 
funders) and "minimizing waste" by treating workers as an expendable 
resource. These ideas should sound familiar. They are foundational concepts 
in the conservative attack on government and the governing philosophy that 
dominates the corporate world.
    This is no accident.
    I've often heard George Lakoff speak of the divergent philanthropic 
strategies of conservatives and progressives. He recounts the tale of a few 
wealthy conservatives - the same families who funded the vast network of 
think tanks and media outlets that dominate our culture today - advising 
progressive philanthropists to apply cost-benefit analysis to their grant 
offering programs. The covert goal of this suggestion was to undermine 
efforts to build a progressive infrastructure.
    This advice was taken. Progressive foundations today typically offer 
small grants, with lots of strings attached, and the absolute minimum of 
resources to hire people to do the work. This ensures that "costs" (aka 
investing in people) are minimized. It also ensures that no money is 
available for long-term "big picture" work to advance the movement as a 
whole.
    The same is true in the nonprofit world. Progressives must fight 
amongst each other for scraps from the foundations that support us. Taking 
a job at a progressive nonprofit is seen as a noble act because of the 
obvious personal sacrifice one makes in choosing a vastly lower salary to 
"do good" instead of "make money."
    In a classic sleight-of-hand maneuver, these same conservative leaders 
followed the opposite path - offering huge block grants with no strings 
attached to be sure enough resources were available to "do whatever is 
necessary to succeed!"
    We can see the difference in the institutions we have today. 
Conservative organizations pay salaries comparable to the private sector to 
attract talent that might otherwise go the corporate route. Billions have 
been spent in a multi-decade strategy to create a conservative 
infrastructure in the form of a network of think tanks that keep 
conservative talent comfy as people shift from think tank to political 
office back to think tank. Just try to imagine Donald Rumsfeld without a 
six-figure salary while he lurks in the shadows - not a likely scenario.
    By contrast, the progressive movement is divided and has no real 
infrastructure to speak of. Our resources are spread thin across "issue 
silos" with no obvious connection across them. Conservatives have a refined 
elevator speech for what it means to be conservative. Progressives don't 
have a clear sense of how gay rights are connected to the climate crisis.
    As we've learned from the study of cognitive policy, we make sense of 
things through our patterns of experience. Our interactions with 
progressive organizations reinforce the sense that scarcity is widespread. 
Every time a passionate young person seeks to "make the world a better 
place," they are taught that the only way to do this is to volunteer for 
free or accept subsistence wages as a demonstration of their commitment to 
the cause. The negative stereotype is perpetuated every time this happens.
    Challenging Scarcity at Its Source
    The only way to address this problem is to get at the root cause - our 
deepest understandings of wealth and prosperity. We need to recognize that 
"doing good" versus "making money" is a false choice. We can - and must - 
find the middle way and reframe the meaning of prosperity.
    Conservatives treat wealth as material accumulation - those who show 
discipline and work hard can be seen through their material success. We 
progressives see wealth at a more fundamental level. The progressive 
understanding of wealth comes from a deeper idea:
    Wealth is Well-being
    Wealth is seen as the well-being of individuals, society and the earth. 
Wealth is already present in nature; it is not "created." Clean air and 
water, strong communities and fertile soils are inherently valuable because 
our well-being depends on them - independent of markets.
    In this view, to "do good" is a form of wealth preservation. We can see 
this with a form of common wealth that we all depend upon - the air we 
breathe. The logic works like this:
    1. Wealth is anything that creates well-being.
    2. Clean air increases well-being, so it is a form of wealth.
    3. Dirtying the air reduces well-being, so it is a loss of wealth.
    4. Keeping the air clean is preserving wealth.
    Put another way, as progressives we recognize that even the hardest 
working person will starve if there is no food. Conversely, we believe that 
the Good Life is about more than money (beautifully depicted in this video 
by Free Range Studios).
    Contrast this with the conservative understanding of wealth:
    Wealth is Material Accumulation
    Wealth is seen as (1) money accumulated by corporations and their 
investors; (2) "created" through resource extraction and labor; and (3) 
owned by whomever controls it.
    According to this view, people are actors who seek to maximize their 
profit. Industrious individuals are seen as "creating" wealth through the 
process of production. Wealth created by industry will "trickle down" to 
the people. There is no need to protect the common wealth - shared 
resources of general benefit to society - because there is no concept for 
common wealth in this perspective. The central consideration is protecting 
the profits of hard-working individuals (and, by extension, the 
corporations that represent them).
    In other words, conservatives believe hungry people should just work 
harder and "earn" their necessities or suffer the consequences.
    Progressives can challenge this notion - and end the plague of scarcity 
in our politics - by recognizing the real source of wealth in the world. As 
a community, we depend on one another. Economists call this "mutual 
provision." A simple example is the division of labor in a complex economy. 
One person grows crops that another grinds into bread. This feeds yet 
another, who manufactures tools that enhance farming practices. Shared 
effort is built on the common wealth of the land that supports everyone. 
The wealth of society grows as people cooperate and share the benefits of 
their efforts.
    At the core of this is the Principle of Human Dignity. Every person is 
valued for the part they play. Work is dignified because it (a) provides 
for the provision of the worker, while (b) enhancing the capacity of 
society to support its people.
    The ironic thing is that the very people who seek to promote well-being 
- progressive philanthropists - are running their institutions based on a 
model of human exploitation. People are seen as an "add on" to the grant 
offering. Focus is given instead to a set of material goals for some 
marginal group. An example would be to fund poverty reduction in 
Sub-Saharan Africa while keeping aid workers at a subsistence level in our 
own society. Another is the use of unpaid interns to "externalize" costs 
and "outsource" the workload - the standard model of worker exploitation 
cultivated and refined in the corporate world.
    Our Own Stereotype - The Protector of Well-Being
    We can change this. The first step, famously articulated in Alcoholics 
Anonymous, is to admit that we have a problem. Our concepts for wealth and 
prosperity are obstacles to success. We cannot build a fair and prosperous 
society without living the values we profess. And it all starts with how we 
think about ourselves.
    A good place to start is with the stereotype that "represents" us. We 
may not be selfish gluttons who bask in the glory of conquest, but neither 
are we self-sacrificing fools who would rather suffer than join the rat 
race. What we really are is Protectors of Well-Being. We understand that we 
are all in this together. It is clear to us that many of the vital life 
supports we depend upon are being ransacked by runaway capitalism. So, we 
dedicate ourselves to ensuring that those around us are protected against 
harm and have the opportunity to seek fulfillment.
    The source of our wealth is the foundation of well-being. Our rewards 
are many - providing for our families while also resting peacefully at 
night because we devote ourselves to helping our neighbors. One very 
important way that we protect our communities is by challenging 
perspectives that threaten our ability to provide for one another. We 
reject the false choice of "making money" versus "doing good" and instead 
create new institutions that promote well-being across society by valuing 
the work of nonprofit employees, teachers, social workers, and anyone else 
who dedicates themselves to the betterment of society.
    The timing is ripe for this transformation to begin. The economic 
philosophies of the 20th century have lead to unraveling markets and 
widespread malaise. Now, as we build new economic safeguards and invest in 
the future, we can learn from this past and change what it means to be 
wealthy. All that conservatives can muster is an appeal to our selfish 
tendencies with their calls for tax cuts (and continue to advance their 
covert agenda to destroy the fabric of society). We can offer a profound 
alternative that appeals to our better selves and leads to real and lasting 
change.
    Historic Opportunity to Reinvent Ourselves
    You might ask why I'm calling out the scarcity mindset during a time 
when funding is drying up for nonprofits as we go into a full-scale 
recession. My answer is that this is an opportune moment for us to set the 
agenda for the new growth that is sure to follow. President Obama and 
Congress have just passed the first stage of an economic recovery plan. The 
experts agree - we need to invest in infrastructure that lays a foundation 
for 21st century civilization.
    This is as true for the progressive movement as it is for our cities 
and towns. Getting progressive politicians into office isn't enough to 
solve the climate crisis or rein in terrorist networks in the Middle East. 
Our problems are bigger than 20th century thinking. We're going to need to 
engage citizens personally and at unprecedented levels. This will require 
that we invest in each other and value people as a centerpiece of our 
efforts. A coherent vision based on a different set of values is needed to 
rise to the challenges we face.
    We have the opportunity to go from being underdogs to agents of change, 
as my colleague Sue Kerbel points out in her article, "Now What? A Note of 
Caution, and an Invitation, to Progressives." This is an historic moment 
that warrants self-evaluation as we envision a better world. And the vision 
we project to ourselves will be reflected in the world we create.
    Change always starts from within.
    --------
    Joe Brewer is founder and director of Cognitive Policy Works, an 
educational and research center devoted to the application of cognitive and 
behavioral sciences to politics. He is a former fellow of the Rockridge 
Institute, a think tank founded by George Lakoff to analyze political 
discourse for the progressive movement.