Today in class, we had a brief but intense discussion about Chinua Achebe’s review of Heart of Darkness. Achebe’s main argument is that Conrad is “a thoroughgoing racist”, whose novel about Marlow traveling at the heart of the Congo — indeed, the heart of darkness — is the epitome of his racist views. This argument is tempered by Conrad’s upbringing during the height of the colonial project, and while hindsight is 20/20, Conrad’s racist views were normalised at the time. The question of banning this book in Western canon is nonetheless important to discuss. In my opinion, I do not advocate banning forms of expression, except when its content is purely hateful. People need to face uncomfortable ideas head on because it is only through dialogue that understanding can be achieved between two people, in this case between the coloniser and the colonised. At the same time, however, racism is a sickness inherent within our institutions, and we should focus not on censoring content that is offensive, but creating new content that complicates dominant African narratives from the West.
We also watched Jonathan Haidt’s talk about The Three Stories of Capitalism. In the talk, he combines the contrasting stories behind capitalist systems and synthesises them into what he sees as the current state of the world. It goes as follows: Capitalism is liberation, which creates innovative forms of production including exploitation, but that it is ultimately the tool against cyclical poverty. We talked in class about the different ways wealth can be created that benefits a larger group of people, but that. The rising trend of the “sharing economy”, represented by players such as Uber for transportation, AirBnb for vacation rentals. The sharing economy suggests that a way to generate wealth is to simply create markets for the surplus of goods already produced. The path to create these markets, most popularly through web applications, are becoming less expensive and more meritocratic. The lack of individual property rights on these goods demonstrates that lessons can be learned from communist modes of transactions as well. It remains to be seen if this trend will last onto the future, or if will die at the hands of resurgent fears about communism.
Finally, we read The Great Enrichment Came and Comes from Ethics and Rhetoric by Deirdre Nansen McCloskey. McCloskey argues that despite the staggering statistics about the current state of the world, we are leagues ahead of the subsistence conditions in which we lived before the Industrial Revolution. In absolute terms, McCloskey is correct in that statement, but I think that her views are too optimistic considering the state of the world. Wealth is being created, but it mostly serves those who own capital, and those who are born outside the luck of being in a good location or family have little to no chances of changing their destiny. Wealth is being created, but we cannot proceed in the manner we have been conducting. It is costing people their happiness, their dignity, and sometimes their lives. The central question, therefore, remains: how do we achieve inclusive growth? Sadly, these papers nor I can fashion a satisfying response. Yet.
We also watched Jonathan Haidt’s talk about The Three Stories of Capitalism. In the talk, he combines the contrasting stories behind capitalist systems and synthesises them into what he sees as the current state of the world. It goes as follows: Capitalism is liberation, which creates innovative forms of production including exploitation, but that it is ultimately the tool against cyclical poverty. We talked in class about the different ways wealth can be created that benefits a larger group of people, but that. The rising trend of the “sharing economy”, represented by players such as Uber for transportation, AirBnb for vacation rentals. The sharing economy suggests that a way to generate wealth is to simply create markets for the surplus of goods already produced. The path to create these markets, most popularly through web applications, are becoming less expensive and more meritocratic. The lack of individual property rights on these goods demonstrates that lessons can be learned from communist modes of transactions as well. It remains to be seen if this trend will last onto the future, or if will die at the hands of resurgent fears about communism.
Finally, we read The Great Enrichment Came and Comes from Ethics and Rhetoric by Deirdre Nansen McCloskey. McCloskey argues that despite the staggering statistics about the current state of the world, we are leagues ahead of the subsistence conditions in which we lived before the Industrial Revolution. In absolute terms, McCloskey is correct in that statement, but I think that her views are too optimistic considering the state of the world. Wealth is being created, but it mostly serves those who own capital, and those who are born outside the luck of being in a good location or family have little to no chances of changing their destiny. Wealth is being created, but we cannot proceed in the manner we have been conducting. It is costing people their happiness, their dignity, and sometimes their lives. The central question, therefore, remains: how do we achieve inclusive growth? Sadly, these papers nor I can fashion a satisfying response. Yet.
No comments:
Post a Comment