Ian Boyne'The dominance of money as the single most important currency of influence, power and status, (has) promoted increased and rampant corruption both in Government and in the private sector corporate world.' -Professor Carl Stone
The highly engaging professor wrote that shortly before his death in the early 1990s. Stone, with his usual insightfulness, saw that there had been a shift in the values and norms of the Jamaican people. In his paper, 'Values Norms and Personality Development in Jamaica', he warned of the consequences of this moral vacuum, noting that no ideology or vision had replaced the former values-set or the nationalist and socialist ideologies of former decades.
Pointing to a deficiency in Caribbean social science research, Stone noted in the paper that, "We rarely focus attention in Caribbean social science theory and research on the realm of values, norms and personality traits. We rarely examine explicitly the norms and values which determine, underpin and help to shape the character and essence of those economic and social structures."
Marxist influence
Perhaps it has been the Marxist influence on Caribbean social scientific theorising and practice which has brought about this neglect, even derision of issues of values, norms and personality. After all, Marxist social science emphasises structures, classes, material conditions, impersonal forces and the iron law of history. Marxism has certainly lost its grandeur in the Caribbean and other parts of the world but bourgeois society is just as obsessed with the material.
wealth not shared
It was the unorthodox Marxist thinker Rosa Luxembourg who noted some time ago that Marxism was not radically different from capitalism in its emphasis on wealth maximisation, growth and the inevitability of material progress. Marxism's only quarrel with capitalism was that the wealth and the material goodies were not being shared with the real creators of that wealth, the working class.
Marxism and capitalism are children of the same Enlighten-ment ethos of material abundance, material prosperity and the quantifiable. What is needed is a radical critique of Western consumptive and materialistic culture; a culture which reduces life to the satisfaction of sensory needs and drives and one which sees 'the good life' in terms of material acquisitions, pleasure, status and power; all of which are easily facilitated by money. But a lot of rethinking is taking place within the West and not just among radicals.
One of the most trenchant critics of this obsession with materialistic and economistic indices of success and progress is the leader of Britain's Conservative party, David Cameron. Cameron has been mounting a sobering critique of Western nations' narrow conception of the good life as captured in gross national product (GDP) rates.
He says what nations should be focusing on is not GNP but GWB - General Well-Being. In an article in Newsweek he writes that "It is hard to escape the fact that in developed societies despite progress, innovation and prosperity, there is something quite not right. In some cases, it is hard for people to put a finger on it: A feeling of emptiness and not belonging, a lack of defined relationships and solid social structures. In other respects, it is readily quantifiable: rates of drug abuse, violent crime and depression and suicide are rocketing".
enlightenment
Continues Cameron in echoes of existentialist angst: "It seems the enlightenment brought forth unparalleled liberty in economic, social and political life, but we are now undergoing a mid-life crisis." The solution he says is that "Today, we need to be just as revolutionary to put us back on track to social prosperity: to respond to that yearning for happiness". Happiness. That's the word and that's the big issue in economics of all the sciences. There is now a branch of economics called 'happiness economics'. It is not likely to get much attention on our local talk-shows and I am sure our hard-nosed financial analysts have littler time for such "mushy stuff".
But others are paying attention.
Says a May cover story on happiness and the phenomenon of happiness economics in Newsweek magazine: "Happiness economics is gaining unlikely proponents-British conservatives, Chinese bureaucrats, the King of Bhutan. Countries as diverse as Bhutan, Australia, China, Thailand and the United Kingdom are coming up with happiness indexes to be used alongside GDP as a guide to society's progress.
In Britain, a labour economist specialising in happiness, was recently appointed to the Bank of England advisory board and the politics of happiness will likely figure prominently in next year's elections. Ministers are beginning to consider issues like poverty, health care and transport in relation to gross national well-being."
scientific research
They are doing so because there is a developing and solid, social scientific research which is establishing that increased wealth does not translate into increased happiness. Well-known psychologist David G. Myers has found that the buying power of the average American tripled since 1950, yet there was no correlation between that increased and the self-reported happiness of Americans.
The United States National Opinion Research Centre at the University of Chicago has asked Americans to rate their level of happiness in happiness surveys since 1957. The proportion of Americans who describe themselves as "very happy" has remained remarkably stable at about one-third despite the tripling of GDP.
In fact, the research shows that Americans today are more anxious.
Strange as it seems, more money is no guarantee of happiness. And over a certain level, increase in income does not translate into increased well-being. Early happiness research conducted by Professor Richard Easterlin long proved this scientifically.
Happiness: Lessons from a New Science, is a good book to look at for further thinking on this matter.
'the lottery studies'
What is now known in the literature as 'the lottery studies' established from the 1970s that, for example, people who won biglotteries generally go back to their normal level of happiness after the initial excitement and thrill wear off.
Social psychologist Phillip Brickman did some important work in this area in 1978 when he studied lottery winners. As Brickman puts it: "Even as we contemplate our satisfaction with a given accomplishment the satisfaction fades, to be replaced finally by a new indifference and a new level of striving."
Reminds you exactly of what the Preacher says in the biblical book of Ecclesiastes. Says Newsweek magazine in its May cover story on happiness: "The golden rule in economics has always been that well-being is a simple function of income. That's why nations and people alike strive for higher incomes - one gives us choice and a measure of freedom.
But a growing body of studies shows that wealth alone isn't necessarily what makes us happy. And it isn't what we have, but whether we have more than our neighbour that really matters." It is really what one scholar calls "the hedonic cycle"; the endless rat race and comparison game; the futile competitive games which humans engage in when they are emotionally and spiritually malnourished.
what makes us happy?
What are the things which really make us happy? A 1998 paper by social psychologist Kristina DeNerve and psychologist Harris Cooper reviewed 148 studies of the relationship between personality and happiness. They found that the people who reported greater happiness were more extroverted friendly trusting and conscientious.
Says the February/March issue of Scientific American Mind: "American capitalism rests on the assumption that we can buy happiness, a belief that fuels consumerism. The research showing a lack of correlation between wealth and happiness casts doubt on this assumption." The magazine goes further, "But competing for wealth is more than just an unproductive way to achieve happiness; it is a recipe for unhappiness".
As more Jamaicans get bitten with the materialistic and consumerist bug, it is well to ponder what the scientific research is showing. And as our political leaders try hard to build an economic paradise here in Jamaica, they should learn that man cannot live by bread alone - tough bread is the staff of life, as it were.
Ian Boyne is a veteran journalist who may be reached at ianboyne1@yahoo.com
