So, does capitalism cause oppression?
Now, I don’t think that anybody is denying that capital can cause oppression, or that our current capitalist system perpetuates oppression, or that people use capitalism to exploit others. This is undeniable. These facts, however, do not mean that capitalism must cause oppression, that it always leads to oppression. More importantly, they in no way show that there exists another system which by nature causes less oppression than capitalism. I will attempt
to argue not only that capitalism does not always cause oppression, but that capitalism is in fact neutral – it can be easily used by an oppressor, but it also places no barrier to those who would stop oppression.
In order to discuss this subject at all, we must first determine what oppression and exploitation actually are. How do we tell if someone is being oppressed?
At first, this seems like a simple question. Oppression is the use of power to give one group or individual power or privilege at the expense of another. From an economic point of view, oppression is unfairly taking value at the expense of someone else. But what does this really mean? Most people don’t oppress anybody directly – they are not personally responsible for taking value from someone else – although perhaps more do so than one would like to admit. Still, most of us who oppress do so indirectly, through our privileged lifestyles. How do we know this? The affluent part of the world oppresses the rest, therefore those of us who benefit from living in the affluent part participate in oppression.
There is a difficulty, however. Not every person in a privileged country or area is an oppressor. Some, in fact, are oppressed themselves. Some oppress and are oppressed simultaneously. So at what point does one start oppressing? At what point is one oppressed? And to return to the subject, what is the real cause of oppression?
To return to the simple economic systems outlined in the first part:
Given simple capitalistic exchange, no exploitation or oppression will occur, assuming that person receives equal value in exchange for their value. Now, if one person gains an unfair advantage by force or deceit, this could be called the start of oppression. One unfair advantage, however, does not cause systemic oppression. For that to happen, one group must consistently gain such advantage over others. To do so must surely require an effort to do so on the part of those gaining the advantage.
Now, consider the other possible economic systems. The leader-based system is essentially exploitive by default. The communal system is not oppressive at the beginning, but surely a properly motivated person could still obtain advantage over others. The person in charge of distributing items, for example, would be in an obvious position to oppress others. Also, anybody could attain power by making alliances with other individuals or groups, etc.
So, what really causes oppression? The desire for power and the desire to gain advantage over others. Now it could be argued that one system tends to produce more oppression than another, but unless a system could be devised which makes oppression completely impossible, insisting that one system is better than another is problematic, and insisting that an entire kind of economic system is wrong, downright silly. The real problem behind oppression is with the oppressors themselves. They will exploit others regardless of the economic situation, and the only solution is to convince people that oppression is wrong, and show them the effect that their actions have on others.
(Read the next part in this series, or jump back to the first part)