Post-Covid-19 Reflection on Capitalist Thinking
The aftermath of Covid-19 left a stagnated economy undergoing recovery in the year of 2021. The widespread lockdown that ensued in the US and in countries worldwide has fostered concern in businesses, promoting the emergence and elevation of technologies such as cloud computing, online meeting platforms, queue management systems, and so on. Simultaneously, long-term quarantine has prompted sociologists to examine the pandemic’s effects on mental health, domestic violence, and other structural consequences stemming from financial distress. Yet the underlying assumption is that restoring the economy is crucial and that the Covid-instigated unemployment is ruinous—ideas that may in fact be challenged. Whether the U.S. should prioritize returning to full-employment or rethink its work-life balance remains ambiguous.
The debate between productivity and leisure has been persistent. A well-functioning economy is needed to support a desirable quality of life; however, working too long of hours is detrimental to personal health and social relationships. The Pre-industrial revolution era saw low work hours and low levels of economic performance. This changed after the industrial revolution, when work hours spiked, marginal productivity per worker peaked, and the world economy expanded rapidly. Then, from post-WWII to 1980, work hours gradually declined. Industrial growth ceased to keep up with the U.S. after World War II, when Europe continued to decrease its work time while the American’s slowly grew again.
Modern society in the twenty-first century clearly reflects these two opposing choices: the Americans have a significantly larger economy; the French, for example, “enjoy a stronger social support network and a much better work-life balance” as a result of working fewer hours (Nast, 2013). While real-world examples as well as economic theory both support the positive correlation between increased working and general economic growth, more work hours “has [also] gone hand in hand with various negative social trends: rising divorce rates, child obesity, drug use, teen pregnancy” (Nast, 2013).
An examination of history reveals the outdatedness of the Capitalist postulation that society must continue its restless endeavor in economic growth based on Industrial Revolution thinking. An earlier scrutinization of private enterprise, “In Praise of Idleness” by Bertrand Russell (1932) condemns the enforcement of unnecessary labor and criticizes the belief in work as virtuous. These outmoded remnants of the pre-industrial revolution model continue to govern modern society—the structure of an overworked majority supporting an idle minority. Russel points to the dichotomy between the overworked and unemployed citizens as absurd, advocating for an equal distribution of work. He maintains that with a moderate level of effective organization, a notion proven to be possible by war-time economies that do not diminish living standards despite dedicating a portion of the labor force to fighting, it is possible to leave society better off altogether. This relates to the current dilemma that Covid-19 has brought upon—an overworked yet underemployed population struggling to revive the economy.
Russell’s argument is flawed, yet it provides comprehensive implications on modern society. In a particular example of an economy where employees work eight hours a day to produce pins until there is a sudden technological innovation that doubles productivity, Russell claims that the same number of employees should be employed but they should work half the time. This line of thought is particularly faulty. For one, it is competition that fosters innovation, unemployment that incentivizes creation of new, more useful jobs to society. Second, it is economically understandable to fire a portion of workers or pay them less, for there is a decrease in labor’s marginal productivity, and this is what solely determines optimal employment levels and wages.
So how can Russell’s arguments reveal what should be done for the current epidemic? His concepts continue to remain relevant in present-day politics, as people strive to achieve a better work-leisure balance while maintaining reasonable economic development. However, Russell’s proposal is unrealistic because it severely hinders potential productivity growth that would improve living standards—in this aspect, it is self-contradictory. Nevertheless, it is undeniable that the majority of the world is undesirably overworked, and that humanity should practice a less-stressful approach to livelihood. This is a daunting task to realize, mostly due to the strong income substitution effect mindset of working more and earning more. As long as people are promised increased return, there is always incentive for individuals to toil and firms to exploit. The paradox of capitalist thinking is that humanity is simultaneously motivated and abused by contention.
With that said, the period of isolation imposed by the Covid-19 pandemic should not pass by without change; instead, it is an important opportunity to reflect more on actual individual experience within Capitalism’s domain. After all, material “productivity” is desirable, but not at the expense of recreation. While Covid-19 has indeed induced concerning damage to mercantile and lives, it gives the opportunity to re-examine the system of intense capitalism and potentially foster a more radical comprehension of what should be achieved in economics.
Edited by Lola Cleaveland
Works Cited
Russell, B. (1932). In Praise of Idleness By Bertrand Russell. Zpub.com. Retrieved 18 October 2021, from http://www.zpub.com/notes/idle.html.
Nast, C. (2013). Why the French are Fighting Over Work Hours. The New Yorker. Retrieved 12 October 2021, from http://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/why-the-french-are-fighting-over-work-hours#.
