Property, Labour, Money and Cultural Forms

The trajectory of the development of the concepts of Economics has varied in different forms and after the advent of complex form of market mechanisms Economics left many concepts without giving them proper meaning and definitions like property, labour, money etc. these concepts in economics are like monochrome inhibiting no resplendence. Economics, somehow, alienated human social existence from the macrocosm of economic concepts. The ‘being’ has been totally alienated from the human labour, production process and reproduction of material entity. So, the discipline which finds its root in the writings of those thinkers who were primarily students of morality and ethics like Adam Smith finds no mention of this dimension of social existence in contemporary economics. Economic Anthropology starts from this and sees the economic phenomena in totality to attach all the subjectivity and objectivity in this academic domain. Marx, On the Thefts of Wood, in Rheinische Zeitung (1842) writes that

“The representation of private interests ... abolishes all natural and spiritual distinctions by enthroning in their stead the immoral, irrational and soulless abstraction of a particular material object and a particular consciousness which is slavishly subordinated to this object.”

Capitalism was accepted as a norm for the fulfilment of desire of ‘private property’ of bourgeoisie. This changed the domain of economics and the systematic change in the meanings of labour, property, money, value, cultural forms became evident especially after Industrial revolution.

Industrial Revolution was initiated by the change in ‘means of production’ i.e. non human inputs used in the production. It changed the mode of exchange, now, based on money. Karl Marx (Economic and Philosophical Manuscript 1844) finds that “money is the procurer between man’s need and the object, between his life and his means of life. But that which mediates my life for me, also mediates the existence of other people for me. For me it is the other person”. Simmel (1978) thought of society as an ‘endless proliferating network of exchanges i.e. market. Like Marx, he finds money representing the highest level of our cognitive interaction with the world. Simmel did not believe in any objective truth or any absolute and all he found is subjective judgement. So basically, he sees truth in relativity. Of course, money is relative but the collusion of state and market which produces a symbiotic relationship between them and state as the authority to determine the value of the currency changes the real value of ‘money’ in favour of corporate forces, which can be seen through the working of ‘virtual economy’ in capital markets. This money is facilitating and perpetuating property relationship by reifying cultural norms of the society.

The relationship between economy and the culture has been examined by different theories and one concept central to this context is “economic culture”. A nation is said to have its own culture like the corporate houses and economic values are related in some ways to overall values of the nation, regions, and so on. The other concept in contrast to this remove notion of self-interest from the culture. While self-interest is seen as vital to economic analysis so culture will be seen as irrelevant. Some economic sociologists responded to this by giving culture all the importance and self-interest as irrelevant. But, a balanced approach is needed to find the way out and it can be found in Weber’s work in his discussion of ideal and material interests in his famous switchmen metaphor. He points to an alternate way of conceptualising the relationship between culture and interests. So, one can say that interests are providing the forces of action while culture is providing the direction of action. The relationship between culture and economic development can be seen in Weber’s study of religion, Tocqueville work on American economic culture in Democracy in America etc. the modern day notion of property and labour has influence on cultural forms. The concept of ‘bundle of rights’ by Maine (1861) can be used in the concept of ‘intellectual property rights’, community ownership of resources in forest areas etc.

Recently, Indian government enacted a law naming Forest Rights Act to give tribal people right over minor forest produce. Basically, tribal people’s economy is based on common ownership and redistribution of the produce but after the liberalisation of Indian economy in 1991, in the name of development Multi National companies started searching for mineral resources and they started displacing tribal people in the name of development. The growing discontent among tribal people and failure of Land Reforms in other parts of the country was one of the prime reasons for the rise of Naxal movements in the country. So, government acknowledged the property rights of indigenous people and gave them ‘some’ rights. Displacement in the disguise of development is turning tribal men into destitute and tribal women into prostitute. This simple example shows how the quest for better growth through adamant strategy is changing the property relationship in the hinterland of country and the effect of changing property relationship can be seen on the cultural forms and labour of the indigenous people. So, in Keebet Von Benda-Beckmann terms the change in the ‘cultural-ideological’ layer is bringing the change in the layers of ‘Legal-Institutional Layer’, ‘social relations’ of property and the layer of ‘practices’. Also, in some of the tribal groups ‘diverging devolution’ is still evident and which is different from the Indian legal System. The effect of privatisation can also be seen on the degradation of environment in different parts of world.

The rapid change in the ‘cycle of catastrophe’ and other environmental factors like El-Nino is showing the intense exploitation of environment by private organisation where corporate houses from the developed world are in majority. Anthropologists, however, shown that the degeneration of environment can be controlled by the use of traditional knowledge and community ownership of the property (Chris Hann). Also, it is changing the social dynamics by increasing class difference and resource mobilization in the favour of some. The use of nuclear power plant for the generation of electricity without the consultation of local populace and growing demographic pressure in urban centres have strong effects on the quality of life observed by the masses. Resources in the contemporary society are managed on the basis of power relationships and the entire context of embededdeness (Ostrom 2002). The language of capitalism has been made so complex that the participation of masses has become almost impossible in the labour market. The recent malice of the process of globalisation has turned the dynamism of market in favour of bourgeoisie. In Globalisation and its Discontent, Stiglitz (2002) showed how the religion of ‘market fundamentalism’ is working in the market. Any alternate form of system is being destroyed at its birth by coalition of market forces and the state. Profit is being accumulated by different methods and it is now very complex. Marx, Eric Wolf, and Hornberg’s theory of finding the modes of accumulation of profit is not adequate. It can be seen through the recent scams in the capital markets and appropriation of the public money in the name of corporate subsidy.

Disparate Power relationship between groups in market, through control over means of production, is reproducing inequality in the social domain. This inequality is now more intense than other ‘modes of production’. The feminist movement can be quoted in this case because there is no parallel way in which the state can be “male” (Wendy Brown 1992). The capitalist economy guarantees private ownership of property, which in turn establishes the dominance of male in the household. So, first this mode of economy created differentiation between ‘public’ and ‘private’ spheres and established the rule of patriarchy in the society. Any attempt to change the established norms of the society gives rise to hysteric response from bourgeoisie, which can be seen in case of movements against homosexuals. Various Presidents of United States did not motivated research in the field of AIDS because it was seemed as the disease of homosexuals or more appropriately “Gay Plague” and the deceased from this disease were ‘Black’ Africans. The whole bourgeoisie society wanted to remove every homosexual from the civilised world. The whole bogey of Civil Rights Groups worked as a part of the “Ideological State Apparatus” (Althusser). The famous work of Foucault over the history of sexuality was termed an illusionary approach of seeing the delinquent and state was busy in saving the bourgeoisie ideology. Education is one of the prominent tools for creating a certain kind of ideology and submission of people’s value towards that ideology.

The capitalist system created a certain kind of ‘language’ in the education sectors which is necessary to be learnt by the individuals to enter the labour market. The system of education has been made so complex that one cannot understand this without going through the systems of education created by the bourgeoisie. This education system is against the traditional cultural forms. The education system is one of the prime factors for creating social inequality. In this type of labour market, different strategies are created to control over resources of different nations. China imports raw materials from poverty ridden Africa and leads in the manufacturing sector. Developed countries are not so much interested in primary sectors of economy because it does not create industries of very high profit and it is also capital intensive and polluting. The various conferences of parties on climate change however gave certain guidelines to decrease environmental degradation and also to restore the climate. But, United States of America and Canada withdrew from Kyoto Protocol because they do not want to transfer technologies to developing world and they showed their concern about the intellectual property rights. An intellectual property right is like ‘bundle of rights’. The inventor gets the income from his/her invention for a period of time and also the monopoly to sell the product. Also, the act of sanction by developed countries successfully attempts to run the policy of different economy like the sanctions over Iran.

On the basis of certain criteria, some currencies are treated as hard currency. United state’s Dollar, Japanese Yen, British pond, Europe’s Euro and IMF’s SDR(Special Drawing Rights) are treated as hard currencies and it can only be used for international trade. Trade between two nations in different currencies than these five is treated as ‘barter’. Countries minting these currencies can successfully put sanction on other countries. Due to sanctions on Iran, it cannot trade in these currencies because banks will not provide access of these currencies to Iran. So, the business between Iran and India is now based on gold and Rupees. Iran gets the Rupee from Indian and then it uses the Rupee to buy Indian goods from the market. So, the international trade is skewed in favour of Developed countries. The role of international organisation is also very important in case of the recent trend of globalisation. When any country finds itself in Balance of Payment crisis then it can go to IMF for loans but these loans are given on the basis of some commitments like that country will take austerity measures, liberalise and privatise economy, enable acts of safeguarding intellectual property rights and so on. So, basically an act of economic form of colonialism is manifested by IMF, which always has chief from European countries. The voting share in decision making is also based on the amount of contributions countries make in the central fund. Increase in the contributions of any country cannot be done by the country itself but it will be approved by central committee where these developing countries have more votes. Similar cases can be seen in World Trade Organization, where in the name of competition the concept of equality is used where concept of ‘equity’ is the only humane option.

Patent and copyright laws have commodified the traditional knowledge base. Earlier these were available to everyone for use. Now, the American company gets the patent of Basmati rice and the folk music of Bangladesh. The discovery which can cure millions of people of world has the sole motive of profit generation. After the end of patent, these corporate houses in collusion with state renew their patent commonly known as “evergreening”. In the Novartis case, Supreme Court of India said that your product is not a result of scientific innovation but an innovation of Lawyers through the use of legal language. But, Novartis have the patent of anti-cancer drug ‘Glivec’ in rest of the world except India. The arrogance of medical companies and corporate houses can be seen through the recent statement by Bayer’s CEO, who said that they are developing drugs for rich westerners not for poor Indians. These pharmaceutical companies are not running with any logic except the logic of accumulating profit and for this if they have to make people sick or kill, they will. These companies are run by strong advertisement campaigns. In these campaigns, the ideology is created among the masses.

In the contemporary society, it has become almost impossible for people to preserve their consciousness or defend their consciousness. The marketing holocaust is contaminating the minds of people by seducing them through the old and emerging forms of communication. Women are main victims of this marketing holocaust. Woman is commodified to increase or change the consumption pattern among women. New forms of technologies are created to attract more women towards the new definition of ‘beauty’. Mushrooming of beauty parlours, plastic surgery hospitals, breast implant techniques etc. is a clear sign of a new consciousness formed by corporate houses which is not genuinely questioned by people who use it. ‘Pink collar jobs’ are created for women and they are shown as ‘showpiece’ in news channels. Songs, films and other things are being produced to defame and degrade women. Classical forms of music, dance and films are being seen as archetypal. One can find the madness in the consumer, who is not accepting the madness of his or world around him. Virtue ethics of Aristotle is being replaced by consumer ‘ethics’ of modern capitalism. The whole society has become ‘one dimensional’. All forms of domination are converted into one form. Some people say that industries are in shambles but ironically I find society in shambles, craving for its existence. The process of homogenization by the suspicious method of globalisation is killing the basic soul of social world. Oneness of mind is creating dullness of mind which in turn is bringing death to the scholarship.

Therefore, the discourses on property, money, labour and cultural forms should be seen in different perspectives and state should be reformed to create judicious society. The ‘hegemony’ created by capitalist forces can only lead to destruction of the ‘total social world’ whose preview one can see through the internationalization of financial crisis’ in 2007-08. The regulated and accountable economic system is the option through which these problems can be tackled. The system where any company will not sell drug at the price of $69,000 Per Year for a person dying of cancer and the state will not become a mute spectator of all these. A more humane kind of economy is needed to run the market.