Page 156 - Cultural Studies and Political Economy

Environment and Pecuniary Culture 145

Individualism and Quid pro quo
Two further cultural characteristics stemming from the logic or biases of
money and prices are quid pro quo and individualism. The terms are closely
related, but provide different emphases. Quid pro quo means there will be no
“communication” unless there is an exchange of equivalences: “What I give
to you must be worth at least what you give to me.” A society functioning ex-
clusively by quid pro quo will engage solely in commodity exchange rela-
13
tions. Individualism, in turn, highlights the self-centeredness of interactions.
Innis, citing Mirabeau, pronounced that money “is the common language of
14
self-interest;” oral discussion, on the other hand, “inherently involves per-
15
sonal contact and a consideration for the feelings of others.” A pecuniary so-
ciety, it would seem to follow, will be based on self-interest with its individ-
ualistic actors caring little for their neighbors.
It was the misguided genius of Adam Smith to propose that a society com-
prised of hedonistic, egoistic individuals would organize spontaneously and
cohere through the “invisible hand” of markets. Ever since Smith’s day, apol-
ogists for markets have insisted that the “invisible hand” transforms “private
vices” (greed, selfishness) into “public virtues”—that individuals pursuing
their own self-interest contribute to the common good because in market-
governed societies the only way a person can maximize her wealth is by of-
fering goods or services that others want. Smith viewed the invisible hand of
the price system as comprising “an obvious and simple system of natural lib-
erty” as “every man, as long as he does not violate the laws of justice, is left
perfectly free to pursue his own interest his own way.” 16
Other cultures, however, reject the rugged individualism associated with
pecuniary culture. Ecologist David Suzuki, for instance, has characterized the
mindset of First Nations and other aboriginal people in the following terms:

It tends to reveal a profound sense of empathy and kinship with other forms of
life, rather than a sense of separateness from them or superiority over them. . . .
It tends to view the proper human relationship with nature as a continuous dia-
logue (that is, a two-way, horizontal, communication between Homo Sapiens
and other elements of the cosmos) rather than as a monologue (a one-way, ver-
tical imperative). . . . It looks upon the totality of patterns and relationships at
play in the universe as utterly precious, irreplaceable, and worthy of the most
profound human veneration. . . . Native notions [are] of a vast, spiritually
charged cosmic continuum, in which human society, biosphere, and the whole
universe are seamlessly rolled into one. 17

To be sure, western (neoclassical) economists have recognized that there
are indirect repercussions of monetary transactions; these they have termed
externalities, or third-party effects, which they nonetheless maintain are