free market feedback loop
Any instutition which serves to increase the level of education or cultural literacy of (i.e., "enlighten" for lack of a better word) a society should never be exposed to market forces. Implicit in the nature of enlightenment is that only those who are already at least a little bit enlightened will seek to further their own enlightment. And even the already-enlightened must sometimes be poked, prodded, provoked further down the path.
Consumerist market forces respond primarily to base needs, desires and drives. While niche markets for those seeking cultural enlightenment may emerge, the market as a whole will never secure enlightenment for society as a whole because society does not realize that it needs enlightenment.
4 Comments:
"Market forces" act not only to limit and redirect funding of education according to the will of market participants. They also server a secondary role of choosing *what* is enlightment/education.
If you choose a particular brand of education/enlightment/religion, and promote it to being universal, of course you'll desire the power of the state to support you and silence those who think differently.
Free markets are powerful in that they settle this kinds of disputes peacefully. Each side can atract its own funding for its own institutions and the outcome of the teachings of the 2-3 or more schools will show who's right and who isn't.
If knowledge/enlightment doesn't offer you a competitive advantage, why would you want it?
re Gabriel Mihalache's question:
If knowledge/enlightment doesn't offer you a competitive advantage, why would you want it?Knowledge/enlightenment is its own end, like friendship. To pursue it for competitive advantage alone would be analagous to adopting a religion solely for the sake of social networking.
I grant you that cultural enlightenment fares a better chance of survival when exposed to market forces than when exposed to an all-powerful state. But forcing each side to secure its own funding simply ensures that those forms of cultural enlightenment favored by the wealthy will be most successful. Of course, they'll advance precisely those forms which best perpetuate and increase their privelege. Economic theories advocating laissez-faire policies will be in fashion, whereas theories advocating explicit mechanisms for equitable wealth redistribution will be out.
Laissez-faire is the most equitable economical system, that I know of. Having lived in Communism, I can tell you that there's nothing equitable in having your efforts and commitment systematically equaled with those of a lazy drunk who can't get fired because `everyone needs a job`.
Of course friendship and englightment serve productive goals. Friendship is valuable because of the trust, feeling and experiences involved, while knowledge has market-value because all true knowledge is like-enhancing.
That they serve productive goals is happy accident. The point is that they have intrinsic worth beyond and outside of their market exchange value. They are priceless in quite a literal sense.
Post a Comment
<< Home