[A Sip of a Book] The Outdated Yardstick of a Commodity-Based Economy: "Right Then, Wrong Now"

Editor's NoteSome sentences encapsulate the entire content of a book, while others immediately resonate with readers and create a connection with the book. Here, we introduce meaningful sentences excerpted from books.

Fred Block, a renowned political sociologist, argues that the world has shifted from an industrial economy to a livelihood economy. However, he points out that outdated institutions and policies from the industrial era continue to hinder progress toward a better society. He describes the livelihood as "the process of creating, maintaining, and improving the social and physical foundations of human communities," and argues that the reason people are unable to attain the livelihood they desire is because the livelihood economy is still being managed using the tools and institutional structures of the industrial era. When modern economics was born in the 19th century, standardized traditional commodities such as gold, silver, spices, sugar, textiles, clothing, and steel accounted for a significant portion of economic output. However, in today's livelihood economy, these goods and services make up a much smaller share of what the majority consumes, making such standards outdated. He specifically identifies the marked retreat of democracy, deepening social inequality, lack of social infrastructure including affordable housing, increasing labor insecurity, failure to address climate change, proliferation of disinformation, and social division as urgent issues to be addressed. He emphasizes, "Understanding the livelihood economy is one way to overcome the deepening crisis of democracy we currently face."

It is noteworthy that thinkers across the political spectrum have argued that reliance on the dual pillars of the free market and a strong central government is not functioning properly, either economically or politically. This has led to a profound disconnect between the general public and established political leaders. When people are deprived of real opportunities to shape their own communities, politics becomes distant from the public, understanding of the political process diminishes, and deep distrust of politicians emerges. This creates fertile ground for outside agitators who promise to overturn the existing political structure. The way to resolve this deadlock is to re-engage residents at the local level. (Omitted) While the ideal of this decentralized participatory democracy has deep historical roots, it was virtually unattainable during the industrial era. (Omitted) However, today, with the possibility of realizing a true livelihood society, this ideal has gained new strength and viability. This is the only sure way to maintain and strengthen democratic self-governance. (pp. 46-47)

Tech giants have repeatedly used their vast financial resources and the political influence stemming from billionaire owners to block government regulations that could effectively curb their destructive practices. There is ample evidence that these companies have spread disinformation, fueled political division, invaded personal privacy, and harmed the mental health of young people. Now, we are facing the disruptive social consequences brought about by a new generation of artificial intelligence. (pp. 156-157)

Until 1900 or 1950, corporate investment may have been an essential element for economic development, but this is no longer the case. In the livelihood economy, government and household spending now play this role. The traditional approach of restricting government spending and wage increases to induce corporate investment is entirely misguided. This mistaken focus on austerity for government and households is preventing us from building the kind of livelihood that most people desire. (pp. 201-202)

Elected officials possess information and organizational resources that are difficult for ordinary voters to access, and they use these to maintain their power. While political parties may win or lose elections, in reality, those who hold power simply rotate within the same political class. This structure creates a negative cycle. Most voters have little opportunity to participate in politics beyond going to the polls every two or four years, and (omitted) as disillusionment with representative democracy is repeatedly reinforced, support grows for agitators who claim they will "end the corrupt status quo." Some voters, feeling alienated from politics and believing the existing system is rigged against them, strongly sympathize with these anti-political claims. Therefore, warning them that "the candidate you support will undermine democratic norms and institutions" is largely meaningless. (pp. 237-238)

The current extreme political polarization bears similarities to the 1930s. At that time, fascist paramilitary groups clashed in the streets with communist and socialist activists in several countries. Then, as now, both sides perceive the other's victory as an existential threat. For example, Donald Trump claims, in order to rally his supporters, that the Democratic Party consists of socialists and communists who are trying to forcibly impose multicultural values using state power. At the same time, those opposed to Trump deeply fear that he will emulate Vladimir Putin by systematically suppressing opposition and banning protests to establish an authoritarian regime. These fears are not irrational. (Omitted) Such fears are remarkably distant from the ordinary differences of opinion seen in normal political times. (pp. 246-247)

Society That Takes Responsibility for Livelihoods | Written by Fred Block | Translated by Lee Donggu | 296 pages | Yeomun Books | 20,000 won