Unquestionably, the free market system has produced remarkable examples of productivity. There is no way that we can even compare an inexpensive hand-held electronic calculator with the adding machines that were universal a decade ago. There is no way that we can compare a home entertainment center---stereo set, color television, TV games, etc.-with anything that existed prior to the 1920's. Kings did not have anything like the gadgets that average American buyers consider to be normal. The high level of craftsmanship in a 1908 car, which in its day cost two or three times a typical family's annual income, did not produce a car as reliable, comfortable, and inexpensive to operate as any Detroit assembly line can produce today. Mass production techniques have indeed produced miracles.
Nevertheless, there are serious problems with any system of production that men can devise, since the tasks of dominion are always costly, one way or another. The world in its fallen state resists our efforts to subdue it, and this includes ourselves. We are rebellious, too. We resent being subdued. We resent the organizational forms which call forth our labors. The problem with today's production system, from a psychological and emotional point of view, is its impersonalization. This is as true in a socialist country as in a capitalist one. In fact, it is probably more true in a socialist country, since the deadening hand of bureaucracy has less competition under socialism.
There is a famous section in the early pages of Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations (1776) which describes the amazing productivity of a then-modern pin-making operation. A single pin-maker could scarcely produce one pin a day without the modern division of labor, but a team of ten using specialized equipment could, in Smith's day, produce close to 50,000 pins in one day, or about 5,000 per man per day. Obviously, this productivity is of great benefit to the consumer of pins. The average man can buy all that he can use.
The cost of this productivity is not measured only by wages paid or the expense of the metal involved. Alexis de Tocqueville, the brilliant young Frenchman whose visit to America led to the writing of his classic book, Democracy in America (1835), commented on Smith's observations: "When a workman is unceasingly and exclusively engaged in the fabrication of one thing, he ultimately does his work with singular dexterity; but at the same time he loses the general faculty of applying his mind to the direction of his work. He every day becomes more adroit and less industrious; so it may be said of him that in proportion as the workman improves, the man is degraded. What can be expected by a man who has spent twenty years of his life in making heads for pins? And to what can that mighty human intelligence which has so often stirred the world be applied in him except it be to investigate the best way of making pins' heads?"
Is there some resolution of this seeming paradox? How can we continue to be the beneficiaries of a system of price-competitive mass production and still avoid the potential depersonalization involved in the high degree of specialization required by modern mass production techniques? As serious Christians, can we suggest realistic alternatives to the secular world?
The first and most important point to bear in mind is that the depersonalization of modern man has been the product of a philosophy of depersonalization. The secular humanists from the Renaissance to the Marxists and existentialists have denied the very foundation of personalism, namely, the Creator who made and presently sustains the whole creation. Speaking of Christ, Paul writes: "For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist" (Col. 1:16-17). Ours is a universe of cosmic personalism. Therefore, we are true persons because we are made in the image of God (Gen. 1:26). We must beware against the intellectual lure of some form of environmental determinism. lt is not the mode of production which depersonalizes men; it is the philosophy of depersonalized autonomy which leads to the depersonalization of modern production methods.
Nevertheless, we do know that Tocqueville's comments are significant. We know, for example, that overspecialization of production leads to a drone-like inattention to detail and therefore an increase of industrial accidents. Such depersonalized, overspecialized methods also produce boredom, and this in turn leads to alcoholism, absenteeism, and other social problems which interfere with overall productivity. Some plants have been redesigned to reduce the specialization of production by adding extra steps in the process for which one worker is responsible, or by creating teams of workers with a true sense of cooperation.
A fact to remember is that depersonalized men are ultimately less productive. Zombies are not creative, careful, enthusiastic workers. The market creates counter-pressures against overspecialization at the point where it threatens profitability. It becomes profitable for less specialized companies to enter the market in competition with older, highly specialized companies. These new firms offer the bored worker an escape hatch. Men need this freedom to choose, and where it exists, the market restrains overspecialization and its side effects. (A side effect is a real effect which we would prefer to avoid and which we did not plan on, so we call these real effects "side effects." Socialist production, being monopolistic, does not provide comparable pressures against overspecialization.
Again, we should not rely on a particular form of economic organization, namely the free market, to protect us from a false religion. We should not be environmental determinists. The crisis of our age is a spiritual crisis, not an economic crisis. The economic crisis is a product of the philosophical and spiritual crisis, contrary to Marx and the Communists, who prefer to see the economic crisis as paramount. What we need is a biblical philosophy of man and labor. This can then be coupled with the institution of the free market, with its freedom of choice in occupations and its competitive pressures to restrain those factors in the production process which mitigate against profitability.
The worker today looks at his labor from the point of view of his ultimate presuppositions. If he is alienated from God, he will be alienated from some segments of God's creation, and increasingly in our day, this means labor. Men are bored with their work. They do not see their labors in terms of God's call to men to subdue the earth (Gen. 1:28-30). They do not find a sense of purpose in the universe, and increasingly, they find no sense of higher calling or ultimate purpose in their labor. Under such conditions, it is inescapable that a man's job will eventually repel him, even if he is a workaholic. A man buries himself in his work to escape purpose, to forget purpose, and to find meaning in his own labor. The sign that he cannot find such meaning in labor may be a retreat from work in leisure activities, or it may be a demonic pursuit of too much work. The average man in our era seems to retreat from work, leaving massive piles of work for the few who become workaholics to bury themselves in. Men often pursue that which repels them and which they know will eventually destroy them, and work can be one of these items. The point is that by abandoning faith in God, the source of meaning, modern men lose a sense of purpose.
As the old Protestant work ethic dies--an ethic which was based on the concept of dominion under God--we find that the quality of labor declines. Every field is threatened by this decline of respect for work. There are not enough workaholics to patch up the crumbling work ethic. Yet men need the ethic in its original theocentric form if they are to remain true to their sense of calling. It was not the respect for work, as such, which created the modern world of mass production. It was the respect for God, who commanded men to subdue the earth for His glory, which created the respect for work. We are witnessing the steady erosion of our spiritual capital, the work ethic's foundation, and as a result, we find sloppy performance. The auto industry has an unwritten rule: never buy a car which was built on Friday or Monday. The workers on Friday were thinking about the fun-filled weekend, and the workers on Monday were recovering from it.
The rise of the home craftsman industry is not simply a product of higher prices for consumer goods. Taking a man's time into account, most home-built products are much more expensive than mass-produced items. Men create products that they can take pride in when they work in the shop or garage. They can point to their own handicrafts and say, "l did it, start to finish." Of course, they didn't. Consider the division of labor necessary in the creation of a simple nail, not to mention a sophisticated power saw. Still, it is the use of a tool in personalized production which can produce a sense of accomplishment. The market responded to this need to feel responsible for the creation of a product, and the "do it yourself" industry was born.
Not all of us can be writers. Writers can always look at the product of their own labors and say, "l produced this." It is one of the great compensations that most writers get, since very few of them make a living at it, unless they are salaried on a newspaper or magazine staff. Not all of us can be sculptors, painters, or fine artists. Not all of us can be craftsmen who produce high priced goods for the rich. Most men have to serve the needs of their fellow men, and their fellow men want price-competitive goods and services. This requires a considerable degree of mass production. But the Christian manager will take care to create a sense of accomplishment among his staff. He will do what he can to promote the gospel of Christ as it applies to labor, not just as a means of personal salvation. We cannot create a sense of accomplishment in our work without having a sense of purpose which provides the framework for the evaluation of our achievement. God's calling provides this ultimate purpose.
Men and women should be encouraged to find personal meaning in their seemingly boring tasks. They are serving God and man by being honest, efficient, reliable laborers. They should also be encouraged to find means of service outside their jobs if their labors are burdensome to them. Service, leisure, recreation, home craftsmanship, drudgery, boredom, and profit: all are lawful and rewarding if performed within the cosmic personalism of God's creation. The subduing of the earth is not always a picnic, and even when it is, the ants show up. But labor is holy if done under God and for God. When men understand this principle, the alienation of modern work will be reduced drastically. The answer to alienated labor is not government ownership of the means of production. The answer is the realization that God is the ultimate owner, ant that we are merely stewards of His property (Ps. 50:10-11; Matt. 25:14-30).
Biblical Economics Today Vol. 1, No, 1 (February/March, 1978)
For a PDF of the original publication, click here:
© 2022 GaryNorth.com, Inc., 2005-2021 All Rights Reserved. Reproduction without permission prohibited.