Economicism and The Reality of Human Happiness at The 21st Century

By

Ibraheem A. Waziri

Iya Abubakar Computer Center

ABU, Zaria

 
Oh me Oh life of the questions of these recurring!

Of the endless trend of the hopeless;

Of cities filled with the foolish;

What is amid thee oh me oh life?!

Whit Whitman, American Poet


It is true that the ultimate goal of human life in this world is to attain a state of absolute peace and happiness. Even in Western philosophies, evil is understood to mean nothing more than that thing that brings agony or displeasure, constituting the disruption of the flow of peace and happiness of mankind, and as such the struggle in life, they say, should mean a struggle to conquer evil. Much debate is on since time immemorial as to which way is the best way for mankind to follow, in his quest to achieving this. There were different philosophers prescribing different methods at different intervals of human history; those as prescribed by religious institutions and the ones by their antagonists. The enlightenment that happened in the 18th century Europe proved the consolidation of one of the above systems: that of the antagonists of the religious institutions.

 
It wouldn't be wrong to conclude that Karl Marx was the very first man who re-wrote history based on Darwin's theory/postulation of evolution (dubious as that may) and concluded that the history of man is nothing more than the history of a creature who is trying to survive, through a quest to achieving absolute peace and happiness by economic liberation. He wrote as against the famous statement of Christ " Seek ye first, the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all shall be added unto you", saying, " Seek ye first, the economic kingdom and all shall be added unto you". That since man is only a product of chance (as "confirmed" by Darwin); his life is nothing more than the service to the flesh. Let him eat his fill, drink to brink, accumulate wealth, have sex, and do everything according to his heart’s cravings. He has no obligations, no responsibilities, but rights and liberties. His organization as gregarious should not be more than meeting in order to come up with a social and political structure that satisfies the need of the flesh only. It is only that thing that can be seen that should deserve attention.

 

This brought about the notion of material description of the world we live, in the realm of man’s social activities: social Darwinism. This understanding evolved the two widely known economic theories, capitalism and socialism. The two theories had in the last two centuries profound influence over mankind. Since then, the indices of national development everywhere in the world are mirrored from the spectacle of the kind of food people eat, mortality rate, life expectancy and other things that have direct correlation to what eyes can see and hands can touch only. That even crisis in human organisations and communities are explained only in the light of poverty. It tries by all possible means to prove to the people of the world that poverty is the only problem of mankind and at individual level only economic activity that should mark the height of the liberation of human mind.

 
 
Socialism failed. We are today left with capitalism, which is nothing different from the other sister-theory, except perhaps in form and structure. But the goal is the same: material description of the universe we live, and the goal to achieve happiness only through economic empowerment.

  
But yet at the turn of the century the system is yet to satisfy the cravings of mankind as earlier thought it would. We find that in America, where the system is most entrenched, people are always complaining about the subjugation they suffer from, by this system, which occupies them only with the struggle to feed and survive. They are beginning to read meaning into life than what this system offers.

 
When Maria Pruezel, the mother of the onetime Broadway Star, Freddie Prinze, wrote the account of what made him committed suicide, in 1977, she concluded thus:  

 
"Freddie had come to the Hollywood with a dream he believed about to come true. But in Hollywood he stopped being a person and became as he put it - a piece of ‘merchandise’. He was offered a fortune to endorse lunch boxes bearing his trademark quip...Freddie the product had replaced Freddie the person." She finished by asking rhetorical questions: ".... Was all this what killed Freddie? Was it that the dollar was more important than the human being with feelings and emotions? Was the image more important than the real person? .... If this is the case, then we live in a society suffering from spiritual malnutrition." (Emphasis mine).

 
This kind of dissatisfaction and misfortune that caught up with Freddie Prinze is today seen in many individuals in America and other parts of the world who are left with no option than to dedicate their life in the service to the flesh. These individuals among the liveliest are celebrities. I cannot remember how often I heard Michael Jackson, The King of Pop, saying he is not happy in spite of the wealth and the attention he has garnered from his audience.

 

To summarize the dilemma of mankind in relation to happiness at the 21st century this anonymous writer says:


"Today we have higher buildings and wider highways, but shorter temperaments and narrower points of view

We spend more, but enjoy less.

We have bigger houses, but smaller families

We have more compromises, but less time.

We have more knowledge, but less judgment

We have more medicines, but less health.

We have multiplied our possessions, but reduced our values

We talk much, we love only a little, and we hate too much.

We reached the Moon and came back, but we find it troublesome to cross our own street and meet our neighbours.

We have conquered the outer space, but not our inner space.

We have higher income, but fewer morals....

These are times with more liberty, but less joy....

With much more food, but less nutrition....

These are days in which two salaries get home, but divorces increase.

These are times of finer houses, but more broken homes...."

 

This system and its kind of definition of what salvages mankind in this world has already failed man in his quest to attain absolute peace and happiness. Perhaps the people of the world at the 21st century should, right away, start thinking of a new system that will serve their needs properly. The new system should bring the indices of national development, to not only poverty but also stability, in marriage and other things "annexed" to social relation, and most importantly those aspects of life that go deeper in dealing with what consoles the spirit of man. Maybe our new table recording the rate of human development, should, after reading mortality rate, poverty rate, life expectancy etc, among subject of a prosperous state, should also read items like contentment, divorce rate, anti-social behaviours, etc. Our new system should also start looking at man from a point of view of a creature that has obligations and duties not right and liberties, which relegates him only to a selfish being, going about seeking for his own entitlements only, not minding that of others.

 

I believe it is this kind of thinking that carries the potential of striking the much-desired balance between the spirit of man and his physical self, which of course is the necessary function for his continuing happiness.


 
April 2004