Despite the prevalence of capitalist ideology and its integration into our everyday lives, the discussion of its negative impacts are few and far between. On the rare occasions that they do take place, the conversations typically fail to capture the actual core reasons for the poor side effects. The profit motive of capitalism introduces a set of problems inherent to the principles in which global capitalism operates on. When the generation of profit acts as the catalyst for capitalist pursuits, consideration for things like waste production, environmental pollution, exploitation of labor, global poverty, and social oppression are often overlooked. The idea of capitalism functions on creative destruction, which asserts that capitalism must produce and organize its own spaces and geographies in order to get around certain limitations such as a minimum wage requirement, environmental laws, a fixed amount of resources, spatial restrictions, etc. The flaw that is inherent with this standard of capitalist practice is that costs will always exist, but they will be only be temporarily transferred to another area or population until that factor eventually depletes. The capitalist economy presents itself as a binary system comprised of both the producer and the consumer. While in the most basic sense this is true, conceptualizing capitalism in that way contributes to the low visibility of externalized costs and their inevitable negative global impact. Perpetuating this oversimplified concept of capitalism allows for ignorance in the context of recognizing which factors and which sacrifices were made in order to generate a product under certain restrictions and within such a high demand economy. Ultimately, it is becoming more direly important to realize that increasing profits cannot exist in a capitalist economy without the pitfalls of implementing temporary geographic solutions that shift the burden elsewhere.
One of the biggest culprits of externalizing costs is the mass generation of waste as a result of planned and perceived obsolescence, two fundamental ideas of capitalism. While planned obsolescence reflects products that are designed to stop functioning at maximum capacity, perceived obsolescence reflects products that are still functioning in reality, but are typically being compared to the newest version of the product. Instead of cultivating social value or investing in durable and sustainable products, capitalism thrives on waste production and relies on the fact that consumers will eventually throw away their products to seek a new one. The mass waste production is a monumental concern, because every aspect of the global economy has the potential to generate waste. For example, “the vast majority of food waste is due to an agricultural and food system set up to generate profit. However, a lack of storage infrastructure in the Global South is a major cause of spoilage and pest infestation before the food reaches markets” [ix]. In addition to the lack of storage internationally, domestically grown foods are still often left in the fields of they don’t meet certain aesthetic standards. Supermarkets are also a contributing factor to the waste because they will deliberately overstock their produce shelves despite knowing that a significant portion of it will expire before being purchased. Furthemore, online shopping, while initially not thought of as a concern, now poses a major threat to resource depletion. The surge of e-commerce has caused an increase in vehicle emissions and cardboard box usage, as well as created an influx of giant warehouses across the country in an effort to accommodate the products that await shipping. Similarly, electricity poses another threat, especially in the United States. U.S. per capita energy consumption, “is twice that of the most industrialized European countries despite a similar standard of living. The United States consumes 25 percent of world energy, but it does so almost 50 percent less efficiently than Europe. Clearly, there is ample room for improvement, especially because Europe is not particularly energy-efficient in the first place” [ix].
Another major source of concern as a result of externalizing costs is the impact it has on the labor forces. Externalizing costs often results in mass factory production in countries that lack or fail to enforce protective labor laws. This enables companies to exploit the workers physically and financially in order to generate more profit by offering a lower price to their consumers. While instances of labor exploitation occur so frequently, a woman whose story of losing both her hands in a factory incident and receiving no compensation has entered public conversation. The woman explained that, “even though I could not pay, he helped me file a lawsuit against LG Electronics, which contracted with the factory where I worked. Finally, about 18 months after the accident, I had hope. Then the judge in my case threw out the lawsuit on a technicality, saying LG had not been properly notified. I wasn’t even given a chance to respond” [x]. The profit motive is so heavily ingrained into the global economy, that it has influenced the justice system for the worse. Increasing profits has deadly costs, and the preservation of humanity is at stake.
Environmentally, the effects of externalizing costs can be staggering on a global scale. For example, the rare earth mining in the city of Baotou, China has some bleak social and environmental costs. Miners would extract metals from pond source, but the inevitable depletion of resources negatively impacted the environment in countless ways. As a result, “surrounding villages are decimated. Stray dogs amble through dessicated corn and wheat fields, the rusted frames of dismantled greenhouses arching above tangles of discarded plastic bags” [ii]. In England, “energy bills could be cut by £50 a year in next week's autumn statement by watering down ‘green levies’ and moving them on to general taxation, under plans being discussed by ministers” [i]. In America, the average car is estimated to cost $1700 in damages caused by air pollution emissions per year [iii].
While some may argue that externalizing costs are necessary to uphold capitalist pursuits, there is still the potential for mass production on more humane and environmentally-friendly terms. There are alternative resources that are overall less damaging, and there are certain standards of living that must be met to maintain the livelihood of the labor force, which should be more willingly protected with legislation. Consumer culture may persist, but sacrificing the wellbeing of the planet and the people working in pursuit of profit is not the solution.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/11/lost-hands-making-flatscreens-no-help
Comments
Post a Comment