I’m debating whether or not the following statement I made in my paper “Who is Christ for us Today?” is correct.
For example, in testing the spirits we can discern that Late Capitalism is a monetary system that denies the Incarnation (1 John 4: 1-4) by denying any greater power than itself and claiming complete control over our bodies. Rather than being sons and daughters of God, (John 1: 11-14) a new creation in Christ (2 Cor. 5:17), it claims that from the day we are born until we die we will be in debt, forced to work it off and then keep it off. Late Capitalism enthrones mammon as the only god worth serving, disciplining our desires so that we conform to its values of lack, envy, and greed. Jesus gave us a clear choice between God and mammon, (Matt. 6: 24) describing us as slaves of one or the other.
This morning I read Dan Bell’s paper “What is Wrong with Capitalism? The Problem with the Problem with Capitalism” and was a little better guided in my thinking. Where would the spirit of antichrist be in Late Capitalism? Is it correct to assign spiritual properties to a fluctuating economic system? So I thought I’d offer a quote from one of the Defenders of Capitalism:
“Capitalism is the only moral social system because it is the only system that respects the freedom of the producers to think and the right of the individual to set his own goals and pursue his own happiness.”
Only moral system. Hmmm. Wow. Not just a little overreaching are we?
I’m amazed by anyone who can really believe this. My thought is that we don’t have to really believe in capitalism for it to dominate our lives. Its defenders see it as an ideal, even a religion, and that America has not reached that ideal because we aren’t yet disciplined and formed by true capitalism enough. I think the ideal is a farce. Look at Ayn Rand. A female hierarchalist, in love with an ideal form of manhood that to her dying day, she never found. Buried with a six foot floral arrangement of a dollar sign. Sad really.
I didn’t realize the term “Late Capitalism” was so loaded and Marxist laden. I guess I was just thinking of the term in a popular sense. Truthfully, I realize I’m way over my head in this conversation and I’ve bitten off more than I can chew. I’m not so adept in economic theory. Since no one has commented I guess that’s okay.