Naturally Greedy?

miniver.blogspot.com

The economic principle I’m exploring is “People generally respond to incentives in predictable ways” and “Institutions are the “rules of the game” that influence choices.”

My research question to help me study the economic principle is “What kind of incentive structure would there be in a Libertarian Socialist society?”

The article published in International Socialist Review by Elizabeth Terzakis titled “What do Socialists Say About… Human Nature?” demonstrates this economic principle because it shows how humans are not naturally Capitalist and that the behaviors of people are shaped by their social conditions. 

In introducing the topic at hand, Terzakis explains the Capitalist stance in contrast to the Socialist stance. She says "Many people think socialism is impossible… because "human nature will not allow it… They think that people are inherently racist, sexist, and homophobic, that they can't help but hate people from other countries, cultures and religions." And on the contrary, "We [socialists] say that human nature is flexible and multifaceted, and that the behaviors of human beings are shaped by their social circumstances. We are all capable of greed as well as generosity." Both of these stances are straightforward and could be supported in some way, but Terzakis does a good job at explaining arguments against the Capitalist stance and in support of the Socialist stance.

Terzakis defines human nature as follows:

Although the human race has seen enormous and rapid cultural evolution, human beings’ basic physical needs have remained the same for hundreds of thousands of years: we need air, water, food, shelter, or other protection from the elements, sleep, parenting for the young, and sex to propagate the species. These general needs are accompanied by a set of specific abilities: because humans have large brains, walk upright, have hands with opposable thumbs, and vocal chords that allow speech, we are able to use our physicality, our bodies and brains and the five senses they afford us, in ways that other creatures can’t. First and foremost, we work in a distinctively human way and, through social labor, we change our environment and the conditions that determine our “nature.”

To summarize, we have a basic set of needs that we must meet using our human abilities, and to determine our nature we change our environment and conditions through social labor in order to meet these needs. She states that "Only humans have the ability to record their history and create art. Only humans can conceive of a project, plan out the various steps to completion, and reflect with satisfaction on a job well done." Here she is expanding on the uniqueness of human nature in our ability to conceive of things beyond instinct like other animals. In essence, she is proving that human nature is not stagnant. We are able to plan out societies and utilize resources in order to meet the same basic needs that animals must.

Furthermore, arguing against Capitalism, Terzakis states that "Capitalism created the conditions for the fullest expression of human nature… [but] Capitalism not only stunts further human development, it is also a stupendous failure when it comes to providing for the basic needs of most people." In Capitalism human nature is reserved for the utmost privileged in society, while the rest of the world must be dehumanized and forced to suffer. On the other hand, she gives examples of how humans show that they are capable of socialism, for "If you pay attention, the elements of human nature necessary for socialism—despite their constant repression by the forces of capitalism—are evident during disasters and in everyday living" such as hurricane relief or other reactions to natural disasters. Examples of everyday people being altruistic are abundant, even in Capitalist society. It is nowhere near a far stretch to say we are good enough for socialism and egalitarian society.

In my next blog post I will research: gift economies