ECONOMICS of the INTERIOR: Part 4 What about Greed?

by Dr. James W. Jackson

Founder, Project C.U.R.E.
Author, The Happiest Man in the World: Life Lessons from a Cultural Economist

In considering the subject of God’s economy, we have already looked at the fact that God has given . . . and has given first . . .; and we also discussed that he is looking for a people who will live out their lives in accordance with his economic principles. But additionally, we need to recognize that

Principle #3: God’s Economy is Not Based on Greed

The word greed is a slippery word and needs to be tacked down at the beginning of our discussion. Traditionally, greed is defined as an excessive or rapacious desire, especially for wealth or possessions. That kind of greed, however, is not to be confused with, or allowed to splash over negatively onto, the rational concept of the pursuing of one’s own personal interests.

The desire for humans to pursue their own personal interests could be, but is not necessarily, greedy or selfish. To possess the desire to make good decisions and have the experience of you and your family ending up better off in this life may actually display the admirable quality of accountability. Good stewardship of life regarding those things we possess reveals our willingness to accept and practice personal responsibility.

Greed or selfishness, however, is the attitude and spirit where an individual insists on his or her own arbitrary demands on other people and their surroundings, regardless of cost or consequence. It is the whole idea of me first . . . it’s all about me. That spirit of greed or selfishness is counterproductive to goodness because everyone does not end up better off in greedy situations.

The negative spirit of greedy selfishness is in direct opposition to the spirit of God’s economy. Sometimes it is difficult to discern greed in the beginning. But you can be assured that harbored selfishness will sooner or later surface into observable and destructive behavior.

The kingdom of Christ and God will never belong to anyone who is impure or greedy, for a greedy person is really an idol worshiper – he loves and worships the good things of this life more than God. (Eph. 5:5)

In my reading assignment I ran across some extremely interesting examples of how, in the end, greed actually delivers a far different result than the person had anticipated in the beginning. Some of the examples are very dramatic and well worth the reading. I will give you the references and know that you will enjoy the research:

Eve . . . in desiring the forbidden fruit (Genesis 3:6)
Lot . . . in choosing to live in the lush, green valley (Genesis 13:10
Jacob . . . in defrauding Esau (Genesis 27:6)
Saul . . . in sparing King Agag and the livestock (1Samuel 15:8)
David and Bathsheba . . . in cheating on Uriah (2 Samuel 11:2)
Achan . . . in stealing and hiding the loot taken from battle (Joshua 7:21)
Gehazi . . . in falsely taking the gifts from Naaman the General (2 Kings 5:20)

The last story I listed, regarding the fellow Gehazi, is just too on point to let go without telling. Not only is it on point, but I personally relate to the story, because I have spent time in Samaria, located in Israel, and also worked in Amman, Jordan, and traveled all by myself in spooky Syria, and stayed alone in dangerous Damascus. In my mind I know right where this incident took place so many years before.

Naaman was the commander-in-chief of the Syrian army, and a dear friend of the King of Syria. He had won many battles and was a great hero, but had tragically contracted leprosy and his skin and body parts were beginning to rot off. On one of his military raids against Israel, he had taken captive a young Israeli girl whom Naaman had given to his wife as a servant. One day the young girl told her mistress, “I wish the master would go back to Israel and find the prophet Elisha. He could heal him of his leprosy.”

The King sent Naaman back to Samaria with a letter of introduction and sacks of gold and silver and suits of clothing. When he arrived at Elisha’s house, Elisha didn’t even go out to greet the great commander. Instead, he sent his servant Gehazi out with a message for Naaman to go wash himself seven times in the Jordan River and the leprosy would go away. Naaman was insulted and became very angry. “Aren’t the Abana and Pharpar Rivers of Damascus better than all the rivers in Israel? If I need to wash, I’ll go to a nice river to wash.” So, he left in a huff.

But some of his faithful men talked him into doing what Elisha had told him to do . . . since they just happened to be in the neighborhood. When he came up out of the river water the seventh time his skin was like a baby’s skin, and his lost body parts were all restored . . . an astounding miracle! Naaman and his entourage returned to Elisha’s house and declared that there was no other God except Israel’s God and said, “Please accept all my gifts.” Elisha answered, “I swear by Jehovah that I will not accept them.” Naaman turned and headed back for home.

Gehazi the servant had been observing all that was going on. After Naaman had traveled a distance, Gehazi caught up with him. Naaman came down out of his chariot, “is everything ok?”

“Yes,” Gehazi said, “but my master made a mistake and remembered that he was in need of the sacks of silver and several suits of fine clothes.”

“Not a problem,” Naaman told him, and gave him twice as much silver as he had requested, plus the fine clothes. Gehazi went back and hid the silver and clothes in his house. The next time Gehazi met up with the prophet, Elisha asked him where he had been. “I haven’t been anywhere.” Thereupon, Elisha informed him that he had seen everything and that now Gehazi not only had the bags of silver and the fine suits of clothes, “but you and your children and your children’s children also will have Naaman’s leprosy. And Gehazi walked from the room a leper, his skin as white as snow.

When you go after something with the motive of greed that which you receive is different from that which you thought you would get! It is always twisted on you . . . thus, the life of disillusionment and regret.

Sometimes, however, judgment and penalty in dealing with greed is not immediate, and that is confusing to those of us who are observing. Sometimes greed is allowed to run its course and the sad results are only viewed at a later point. But, we can be assured that God’s economy of the interior is not based on greed, because selfishness is not consistent with the characteristics of goodness:

Purity is best demonstrated by generosity. (Luke 11: 41)

God, who has already generously given, is looking for a people who will be characterized by their giving and not their grabbing. 

Next Week: You Can’t Manipulate God 

    (Research ideas from Dr. Jackson’s new writing project on Cultural Economics) 

© Dr. James W. Jackson   

Permissions granted by Winston-Crown Publishing House

  

www.drjameswjackson.com   

Dr. James W. Jackson often describes himself as "The Happiest Man in the World." A successful businessman, award-winning author and humanitarian, Jackson is also a renowned Cultural Economist and international consultant, helping organizations and governments to apply sound economic principals to the transformation of culture so that everyone is "better off."

As the founder of Project C.U.R.E., Dr. Jackson traveled to more than one hundred fifty countries assessing healthcare facilities, meeting with government leaders and "delivering health and hope" in the form of medical supplies and equipment to the world's most needy people. Literally thousands of people are alive today as a direct result of the tireless efforts of Project C.U.R.E.'s staff, volunteers and Dr. Jackson. 

To contact Dr. Jackson, or to book him for an interview or speaking engagement: press@winstoncrown.com

SYSTEMS MATTER Part 8: Self-Interest vs. Selfishness

by Dr. James W. Jackson

Founder, Project C.U.R.E.
Author, The Happiest Man in the World: Life Lessons from a Cultural Economist

When Adam Smith introduced the verbiage of “self-interest” into his economic and cultural reporting he laid himself wide open to misunderstanding, misinterpretation, and criticism.

A person of a different economic ilk, wanting to end all arguments regarding the intent and integrity of Adam Smith, and dismiss him as a greedy scoundrel, would only need to portray him as the champion of selfishness. Such a person needed only to claim, “Smith is the epitome of the bourgeoisie capitalist interested in only grabbing, at any cost, the wealth of this world at the expense of the poor and downtrodden.” The verbal assassination would have pretty much been accomplished at that point.

Instead of indulging in the semantics game, let’s stop and examine just what Adam Smith was saying:

. . .the obvious and simple system of natural liberty establishes itself of its own accord. 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, and to bring both his industry and capital into competition with those of any other man, or order of men. The sovereign is completely discharged from a duty in the attempting to perform, which he must always be exposed to innumerable delusions, and for the proper performance of which no human wisdom or knowledge could ever be sufficient; the duty of superintending the industry of private people, and in directing it towards the employments most suitable to the interest of the society. According to the system of natural liberty, the sovereign has only three duties to attend to, three duties of great importance, indeed, but plain and intelligible to common understandings: first, the duty of protecting the society from the violence and invasion of other independent societies; secondly, the duty of protecting, as far as possible, every member of the society from the injustice or oppression of every other member of it, or the duty of establishing an exact administration of justice; and thirdly, the duty of erecting and maintaining certain public works and certain public institutions, which it can never be for the interest of any individual, or small number of individuals, to erect and maintain, because the profit could never repay the expense to any individual or small number of individuals, though it may frequently do much more than repay it to a great society.(1)

Adam Smith presumes that every person wants to end up better off in life. If left to pursue voluntary transactions of business and barter with other free individuals, the only transactions that will be successfully completed are those transactions where both free trading partners end up better off. A system that promotes that freedom where everybody ends up better off not only encourages additional such transactions but greatly increases the total volume of successful business.

But the human desire to end up better off could be, but is not necessarily, selfish. To possess the desire to make good decisions and end up better off in life displays the admirable qualities of accountability. Good stewardship of life and of those things we possess reveals our willingness to accept and practice personal responsibility. Selfishness is the attitude and spirit where an individual insists on his or her own arbitrary demands on other people regardless of consideration or cost. It is the whole idea of me first . . . it’s all about me. That spirit of selfishness is counterproductive to good business because both parties do not end up better off.

That is why Adam Smith insisted that the government must not be greedy or selfish either. The greedy intentions of the government, or the individuals who control the government, are also counter-productive to the positive growth of an economy, because when they are greedy all parties involved do not end up better off.

Smith tried to build into the system checks and balances to control the selfishness and greed even of the government or Sovereign by saying that their reach and function should be limited to (1) protecting their citizens from outside danger or oppression, (2) the rule of law where the citizens are protected from other individuals within the country, and (3) the establishing and maintaining of certain institutions or services that could not be offered by a single person or a small group of individuals, e.g. courts, recording of public documents, road systems, etc.

The very government itself has the power and opportunity to induce its constituency, by promises of largesse, to believe that the government can exclusively make the citizens better off through receiving favors, grants, and subsidies from it. Those promises are based on a delusion that the government of the nation envisions, generates, and controls all the wealth of that nation, and has the right to distribute that wealth to whomever is willing to totally acquiesce to the government leaders making those promises. The government does not earn any of the money it promises to give away, but, rather, has to take the money away from individuals who have already earned it. Those promises of favors, grants, and subsidies are a form of buying-off the constituents.

When the government promises to take away from those constituents who have earned wealth in order to redistribute that wealth to those who did not earn the wealth, they are appealing to the selfishness of the recipients who would enjoy receiving largesse gained from the efforts of others rather than from their own efforts. A government or Sovereign may have the power to manipulate a model of redistribution through coercion, but, obviously, all the individuals in the deal do not end up better off. At that point the economic model moves into a model of contraction rather than an economic model of growth and production, and over the long haul it cannot remain sustainable.

As we will see later, the free market system depends on the possibility of voluntary and free political and economic choices within the framework of a fair and just rule of law. Throughout history there have been very, very few occasions where cultures and civilizations have experienced the phenomenon of the combination of political and economic freedom at the same time. Great Britain and the United States experienced that kind of exceptional freedom.

The resulting economic system did allow for the observing of what could happen if that political and economic freedom could come together and function successfully. There had never before been such a model created of economic growth, production, and expansion, and to think that the successful experiment had been realized in such a relatively short amount of time.

The exceptional results of the American experiment are largely due to the thinking and writing of several men of common ancestry divided by a large body of water called the Atlantic. They were able to compress, condense, and consolidate the dreams and the desires of the millions of people throughout the centuries who had longed for the opportunity to experience economic and political freedom.

In America, Thomas Jefferson was writing about a new nation that would be the first in history established on the principle that every person is entitled to pursue his or her own values. On the other side of the ocean, Adam Smith was writing about the possibilities of a free market where individuals could pursue their own objectives of voluntary transactions. Both believed that the role of the government should be that of an umpire and not a participant. Each believed that the pursuits of one’s own values and interests were not necessarily greedy or selfish, but necessary for everyone to end up better off.

Those men of creative vision believed that an entire group of people could move forward and achieve the goal of personal as well as national wealth. It was possible to pursue self-interest without being selfish or greedy, and the end result would be a unique model where everybody ended up better off.

 Next Week: Essentials of Free Market
            (Research Ideas from Dr. Jackson's writing project on Cultural Economics)

© Dr. James W. Jackson   

Permissions granted by Winston-Crown Publishing House

  

www.jameswjackson.com  

 Dr. James W. Jackson often describes himself as "The Happiest Man in the World." A successful businessman, award-winning author and humanitarian, Jackson is also a renowned Cultural Economist and international consultant, helping organizations and governments to apply sound economic principals to the transformation of culture so that everyone is "better off."

As the founder of Project C.U.R.E., Dr. Jackson traveled to more than one hundred fifty countries assessing healthcare facilities, meeting with government leaders and "delivering health and hope" in the form of medical supplies and equipment to the world's most needy people. Literally thousands of people are alive today as a direct result of the tireless efforts of Project C.U.R.E.'s staff, volunteers and Dr. Jackson. 

To contact Dr. Jackson, or to book him for an interview or speaking engagement: press@winstoncrown.com