morality of profit

Consequences of Achieving the American Dream

I worked for a moving company once. It was in my early 20's, I'd just moved to Anchorage, Alaska, and it seemed like a solid source of income for the summer. This place had a bunch of young misfits boxing up and delivering people's earthly belongings. They were a fun group, but perhaps the most memorable acquaintance that I made was with a soft-spoken, middle-aged, black man named Jerry. Over the course of the summer, information about Jerry gradually leaked from my co-workers. As it turned out, this unassuming guy had kept his nose to the grindstone, double-shifting as a mover and long shoreman for 30 odd years, even started his own little freight company, and had amassed a small fortune.

Years earlier, I had worked in Sun Valley, Idaho, helping to facilitate a weeks-long banquet for some of the wealthiest people in the world. There, the annual Allen and Company retreat was a much anticipated event. Locals lined up to catch any drippings that overflowed from the cash cornucopia rolling through town. I was one of those - living off the fat of kings. I began to wonder what events or choices had brought these rich people to their position in life and later learned of some of the atrocities that their respective business operations had lead to. I grew suspicious of the very wealthy, a mindset that remained for years. And then I met Jerry. I began to see that the circumstances that lead to financial success were not so fixed or rigid; that acquired resources need not come at a heavy cost to others. More importantly, I learned to empathize with the profiteer. I saw how people often feel entitled to wealth when the sweat of their labor stains every dollar. Before that summer, I thought of profit quite negatively, but Jerry was irresistibly respectable. He was meagerly educated, but he was hard-working, cautious, gracious, and frugal, and he was going to retire soon, a wealthy man. I wondered if some of the Allen and Company group had had a similar experience. I wondered whether their wealth began with hard work and deserved success; if the adverse fallout of their transactions might go unnoticed by them for some other, justifiable reason, or if I had been right all along - that the pursuit of profit can blind us from the real and complete effects of our actions. Finally, I wondered whether any of them, from Jerry, with his humble success story, to the billionaire CEOs in Sun Valley, had ever stopped to consider what their actions said about their own personal character, or if they had simply started down a path and eventually lost sight of their larger purpose, like so many of us do. Our American mythology is riddled with tales of pioneering individuals who face remarkable odds and battle their way to a life of plenty. The imagery conjured up in these stories is often of overcoming external obstacles with perseverance - the competitive spirit. It has become standard American dogma to espouse competition as synonymous with freedom - we are feisty after all. In America, we have the freedom to "make it" by carving out a big slice of the pie. But nowhere do the stories go further, describing the consequences of achieving the American dream.

Asked whether profit is moral, and I immediately think about a wresting of resources (taking slices out of the pie). Clearly, there are some who feel that profit is as natural as breathing; that even discussing its morality is a nonsensical or wasted exercise. Others find the idea of profit repulsive, on the grounds that profiting creates both 'winners' and 'losers,' while all people are entitled to certain human dignities which are inevitably denied to some who happen to be on the wrong end of the exchange. And then there are those who fall in the middle, claiming that perhaps some profit is fine so long as all people are assured the opportunity to live in relative safety and comfort. I don't wish to debate this particular issue. I see plenty of examples of individuals from all over this spectrum. Rather, I feel that there is a deeper issue, one that underlies any discussion of the morality of wealth creation and distribution: the issue of context. If we are to analyze the morality of profit, we must understand the value system that brings about profit in the first place, since only in a system of shared values can we agree on what is moral.

Profit is the byproduct of competition, so this is really about the morality of competition. Since morality is measured against one's value system, it would serve this discussion to describe the values associated with the competitive model. I will attempt to outline the values underlying both ends of the spectrum, from "profit is absolutely and always moral" to "profit inevitably leads to humanitarian atrocities."

In the extreme case of absolute free-market competition, which moralizes virtually any profit, the requisite values are harsh and divisive. Atop the list is individualism. In the absolute pursuit of profit, each individual is responsible for his/her personal outcome, and should not expect others to contribute to his/her success unless it serves those individuals as well. Further, in order to prevent any cooperative opposition, one is rewarded for isolating others from one another. Next, since all wealth is derived, directly or indirectly, from natural resources, natural resources must be considered commodities. Also, in order to prioritize personal competitive achievement, one must think only in time frames shorter than one or two human lifetimes.

In absolute competition, internal exchanges of resources tend to be cyclic - passing from hand to hand and eventually back again - or else pile up conspicuously in the hands of the most successful individuals. Acquisitions from afar, on the other hand, serve the dual function of being both less noticeable and more favorable for local citizens. Separating from distant people also helps to justify their losses as the inevitable outcome of competition, and helps to alienate them. Separation from others, once again, supports the competitive model.

One of the most highly touted values associated with absolute free-market competition is that everyone has an equal opportunity. According to the model, an individual's success is determined by their choices. Poor people are poor because they made bad choices. This value is debatable since it assumes that the differences between peoples' achievement is even a point of discussion. An alternative is the assumption that individuals simply have variable abilities and thus, one's outcome is the product of their intrinsic 'worth.' In any case, there must be some justification for the disparity that results from competition.

From what I was able to gather during my months with Jerry, I would have to say that despite his success in profiting from people's need to transport goods, this list of values is far from his own. Rather, I think he might identify with the equal opportunity and individual responsibility values, but not necessarily the resources as commodities or imperialism values. Such is likely the case for most Americans, who might subscribe to some of these values, or at least variations of them. As far as the Allen and Company billionaires, I imagine that perhaps a few of them would identify with this entire list of values, or else their choices might point to them, even if they consciously claim otherwise. Instead they might use the classic "it's just business" justification for any contradiction between their stated values and their professional choices.

As a teacher, a member of a socialized institution, I find myself surrounded by individuals whose values are quite contrary to those from the competitive model. While there is certainly a spectrum of teachers, and there is even a strong element of competition embedded in our academic institutions, there seems to be a significant tendency toward non-competitive values for which virtually no profit is moral. I will call this the communal or cooperative model, and attempt to describe the values associated with absolute cooperation.

First and foremost, the communal model emphasizes cooperation and connection, even with distant peoples. Communities, as systems of individuals, function best when each member contributes to the good of the whole, and the more inclusive the whole, the greater the body of talent/resources on which all can draw. Cooperative behavior, as we have seen to great effect in our industrial society, can lead to incredible efficiency. Also highly valued in this model is sustainability. Since the communal mode focuses on the well-being of the group, all decisions must consider the long-term consequences for the community. Perhaps the backbone of the communal/cooperative model is the idea that all individuals have equal inherent worth despite varied circumstance or abilities. In order to work for the common good, one must value all members of the community equally. As soon as a person starts to value themselves above or below another, competitive values emerge. Further, in this model no one person or thing can truly be considered independent of the whole.

The only examples of this sort of value system that I'm aware of are in cases with aboriginal peoples, and even then I'm almost certain that they contend with nearly perpetual occurrences of individuals violating these values. In order to maintain this system, everyone must sacrifice a degree of their autonomy, which is a lesson that doesn't come easily to most people and certainly doesn't jive with the traditional American attitude.

Whether or not either of these ends of the spectrum is feasible, I would challenge the reader to consider where they stand. One of the real freedoms that all of us have is the freedom to choose our own value system, which is what makes moral arguments both extremely complicated and often very heated. I wonder, however, whether many of us ever stop to consider the implications of our values. I know that in my case, values arose quite passively, as the product of both my upbringing and my life experiences. I imagine that for many this is also the case - circumstances bring about beliefs. But we are not prisoners of our circumstances. We have a choice. I suggest we take a moment to figure out where we stand, whether our choices agree with that stance, and whether our values reflect our best self.