Capitalism--its Nature and its Replacement

Buddhist and Marxist Insights

Graham Priest

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2021
• Print ISBN:
  9781032049106
• eBook ISBN:
  9781000463507
• Topic: Filosofia
• Subtopic: Storia e teoria della filosofia

In this third decade of the 21st century, deep problems plague our world. Many people lack adequate nutrition, health care, and education, because–while there is enough wealth for everyone to meet these basic needs–most of it is tightly controlled by precious few. Global warming causes droughts, floods, rising sea levels, and soon the forced migrations of millions of people. In this book, philosopher Graham Priest explains why we find ourselves in this situation, defines the nature of the problems we face, and explains how we might solve and move beyond our current state. The first part of this book draws on Buddhist philosophy, Marx's analysis of capitalism, and their complementary role in explaining our present crisis and the events that led us here. In the second part of the book, Priest turns to the much harder question of how one might go about creating a more rational and humane world. Here, he draws again on Buddhist and Marxist ideas as well as some key aspects of anarchist thought. His discussion of the need for bottom-up control of production, power, ideology, and an emerging awareness of our interdependence is a must-read for anyone who cares about the future of the planet and our latent capacity to care for each other.

Key Features

• Explains the necessary elements of Marxist, Buddhist, and anarchist thought–no background knowledge of political theory or Buddhism is necessary

• Shows how Buddhist and Marxist notions of persons are complementary

• Convincingly shows capitalism's role in creating current socio-economic problems

• Provides an analysis of the corrosiveness of top-down power structures and why they should be eliminated in a post-capitalist state

• Discusses capitalism's role in war, environmental degradation, and race and gender-based oppression

The Open Access version of this book, available at http://www.taylorfrancis.com, has been made available under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.

PART I
Right View

DOI: 10.4324/9781003195146-1

As far as social economic theory goes, I am a Marxist.

Tenzin Gyatso, His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama¹

1 https://www.watch?v=D/watch?v=DhvlnC-oKEw

1
PROLEGOMENON TO PART I

DOI: 10.4324/9781003195146-2

1.1 Introduction

It is clear that the world at the start of the 21st century has many problematic aspects. The majority of its wealth is in the hands of a small minority of people and corporations (“the 1%”). A large part of the world’s peoples lack adequate nutrition, health care, and education, whilst there is enough wealth in the world for all to have these things. Global warming is causing erratic weather patterns, droughts and floods, rising sea levels, and—soon—mass migration. Clearly, the world could be a much better socio-economic place, and we should act to make it so.

If one is to act effectively in some situation, one must understand that situation, its features, the causal factors operating, and so on. If one does not, there is a good chance that one’s action will have no positive effect. Thus, exorcism of demons is not a good way of curing mental illness; and if one designs small microchips using classical electro-dynamics rather than quantum electro-dynamics, they will not work. Even worse than producing no effect, one may produce negative ones. Thus, think, for example, of practices in the history of medicine which were aimed at curing a person but which actually, because of medical ignorance, injured them. Or, closer to home, if one does not understand the mentality of some bully or dictator, one may attempt acts of appeasement for self-protection, whereas, in reality, such acts merely encourage the bully/dictator to further acts.

The aim of this book is to promote action aimed at moving the world in the direction of a more humane and less irrational one.¹ It is therefore necessary to understand the present situation. That is the function of this part of the book. It provides an analysis of the social/economic/political situation in which we find ourselves in the first part of the 21st century.²

1. The term irrational, here, has no heavy-duty theoretical sense. It just means manifestly stupid when you think about things. 2. This part of the book started life as Priest (2018a).

1.2 Buddhist and Marxist Philosophies

The analysis I shall provide has two mainsprings: aspects of Buddhist philosophy and aspects of Marxist philosophy.

Buddhism and Marxism may seem unlikely bedfellows. The first originated 2500 years ago in an Asian and largely agricultural society. The second originated less than 200 years ago, in a European and developing industrial society. And prima facie, their concerns are quite different. The aim of the first is the attainment of nirvāṇa; the aim of the second is political revolution. These are obviously different goals.

But the two philosophies have at least this much in common: both say that life, as we find it, is unsatisfactory; both explain aspects of why this is so; and both offer the hope of making it better. In fact, they have a lot more in common than this. Waistell puts matters as follows:³

Both philosophies are based on questions of how we can be reconciled with ourselves and each other; both recognise the depth of human suffering and offer liberation from it; both critically analyse existence and seek radical change; both seek to transform consciousness, ending alienation and selfish individualism; both recognise that thought is not enough to end alienation and suffering—practice is also necessary; and both emphasize causality—it is necessary to eliminate the causes of suffering.

More on all of these matters in due course.⁴

3. Waistell (2014), pp. 202 f. He attributes the thought to Shields (2013). 4. I note that mine will hardly be the first attempt to put together ethical and political views from different times and places. Notably, Liberation Theology, as developed largely in Latin America, melds Catholicism and Marxism. Personally, I find this conjunction less felicitous.

Perhaps just as important as what these traditions have in common is what they do not have in common. There are a number of matters about which the one does not say much and the other does. In this way, the two may be taken to complement each other.

Thus, for example, there is obviously a strong connection between ethics and political philosophy. Ethics has implications for the kind of society in which we live—or in which we should live; and the kind of society in which we live is very often a crucible for ethical decisions.

Buddhism has always been strong on ethics and its rationale: its core principles go back to the very foundation of the subject. There are remarks of a political nature in some of the canonical texts, such as the Aṅguttara and Dīgha Nikāyas, and Nāgārjuna’s Ratnāvalī;⁵ and over the last 50 or so years, there have been Buddhist thinkers such as Thich Nhat Hanh and other members of the “Engaged Buddhist Movement”, such as Sulak Sivaraksa and Bikkhu Bodhi, who have been concerned with ending wars and establishing more compassionate societies.⁶ However, generally speaking, Buddhism has had relatively little to say about socio-political philosophy. It has clearly put more emphasis on private practice than public practice. Its major emphasis has been on how individuals can change themselves.

5. For a discussion of some of these, see Bodhi (2012). 6. See, e.g., Queen (1995), King (2005), Bodhi (2009). In this context, the life and thought of the anarcho-socialist Zen Buddhist priest Uchiyama Gudō (1874–1911), executed for criticism of, and alleged conspiracy against, the Meiji state, deserves to be better known. See Victoria (2006), ch. 3.

By contrast, Marxism has always been strong on political philosophy and, in particular, the nature of capitalism and its unsatisfactory consequences; but it has always been weak on a systematic ethics. Marx and Engels combine suggestions that ethics is part of the superstructure, and so relative, with a moral condemnation of capitalism whose tone is anything but relative. Perhaps the closest we get to a systematic account of ethics is in Marx’ Paris Manuscripts of 1844. The young Marx operates with a notion of human flourishing based on a certain understanding of human nature (“species being”). Whether or not he gave up these ideas is a moot point, but the notion largely disappears from his later writings—those which contain his detailed analysis of capitalism.

Turning to matters metaphysical, it might well appear that Buddhism and Marxism have different, and quite incompatible, views.⁷ On closer inspection, however, there is much more commonality than one might expect. Both have similar views on what it is to be a person, and both are much concerned with human interdependence. Yet even here, Buddhism and Marxism provide different, and complementary, aspects of these matters. When it comes to personal identity, Buddhism stresses the role of conceptualisation and self-conceptualisation; Marxism, on the other hand, stresses the essentially social nature of persons. Concerning interdependence, Marx stresses the social interconnectedness of people and the false and ideological nature of social atomism. Buddhism says little of this, but locates matters in a much more general picture of the interdependent nature of all things, and of our failure to understand this.

7. I refer here to what one might call the core aspects of Buddhist metaphysics. Different schools of Buddhism articulate these in radically different ways.

In a nutshell, then, Buddhist philosophy provides a general account of the human condition: the place of people in the kind of world in which we live. By contrast, Marxist philosophy provides a specific account of the human social condition, and in particular, of the human social condition in a capitalist political economy.

Thus, aspects of Marxist and Buddhist philosophy can each provide something the other lacks. These may be combined to form a more comprehensive picture. In this part of the book we will see how.⁸

8. Sympathetic discussions of the connections between Buddhism and Marxism can also be found in Brien (2004), Slott (2011), Struhl (2017), Waistell (2014), Gibbs (2017), and, in its own way, Loy (2008)—though it is not explicitly thematised in this way. Karsten Struhl and I, in particular, have been discussing these matters for some years now, and we find ourselves very much on the same page about most points.

1.3 Nota Bene

To forestall some misunderstandings about what is going on here, let me make certain things clear about how I am (and am not) proceeding.

First, historically, Buddhism and Marxism both have a substantial diversity of forms. There are striking differences between, for example, Theravāda Buddhism, Tibetan Buddhism, Pure Land Buddhism, and Chan (Zen) Buddhism.⁹ Similarly, there are striking differences between the Marxisms of Lenin, Gramsci, Althusser, and G. A. Cohen.¹⁰ I will not be endorsing any one school of Buddhist or Marxist thought. What I will be endorsing are quite generic views, held in most of the different traditions of each kind.

9. For an outline of the different Buddhisms, see Mitchell (2002). 10. For an outline of the different Marxisms, see McLellan (2007).

Indeed, even within these generic views, it is only certain parts of Marxist and Buddhist thought on which I will be drawing. In fact, there are parts of both with which I disagree, as will become clear in due course. Which views I am endorsing I will explain—and not only explain: I will defend them and argue that they are correct.

And if someone wishes to tell me that without the other parts, it’s not Buddhism or Marxism, this is a matter of indifference to me. I attach no importance to the labels. They are there to acknowledge the sources of the ideas.

1.4 The Structure of Part I

A more detailed account of the structure of Part I of the book is as follows. I shall not assume that the reader knows much about either Buddhist or Marxist philosophy. So in Chapter 2 I shall explain and defend those parts of Buddhist philosophy on which I wish to draw. In Chapter 3, I will do the same for Marxist philosophy.

Behind much socio-political philosophy is an understanding of what a person is. Those with but a passing acquaintance with Marxist and Buddhist philosophies might well have the impression that they have a radically distinct understanding. As I have already said, they do not—though each may put emphasis on different matters, and so complement the other. In Chapter 4 I will explain and defend this account of what it is to be a person.

In Chapter 5, I will draw a number of the threads of the previous chapters together to provide a much more general picture of how the aspects of Buddhist and Marxist thought I have endorsed complement each other. What will emerge from this synthesis is the general analysis of the present social/economic/political situation sought.

Chapter 6 draws the general conclusion that we need to move to a post-capitalist society, and so lays the ground for the discussion of Part II of the book.

1.5 Conclusion

The analysis of the world that will emerge from the discussion in this part of the book is obviously a synthetic one. But it does not simply cobble together two independent things. There is a genuine synergy between them, each amplifying and enhancing the other. Moreover, in any genuine synthesis of this kind, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. What will emerge then, I hope, is a highly distinctive—and correct—analysis of the contemporary human socio-economic situation.

2
SOME ELEMENTS OF BUDDHIST PHILOSOPHY

DOI: 10.4324/9781003195146-3

2.1 Introduction

In this chapter I will lay out and defend the first mainspring of the analysis: certain elements of Buddhist philosophy.

A little history may provide a useful context. According to the standard history,¹ the Buddha (enlightened, awakened one), Siddhārtha Gautama (6th or 5th century BCE), experienced enlightenment (awakening) in Bodh Gaya (north-east India). The Four Noble Truths (Chatvari-arya-satyani) fo...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication Page
• Contents
• Prologue
• Part I Right View
• Part II Right Action
• Epilogue
• Bibliography
• Index