War & Capitalism

I discovered that Einstein and Freud corresponded about the inevitability of war. In 1932 Einstein asked Freud if he thought humankind could ever divest itself of war. In his response Freud did not hold out much hope that man could ever stop warring. But what he wrote encouraged Einstein to think that there was a possibility that mankind could live in relative peace. Freud, though, was surprised that Einstein hadn't accepted war as inevitable and that it was an inexorable part of human nature.

Freud was not an optimist. However, in his letter to Einstein he left a ray of optimism in the form of the contradictory nature of mankind. He explained to Einstein a theory he had developed (as the magazine article explained) in reaction to the unprecedented brutality of the First World. Freud said that that man is driven by two equally powerful instincts, an instinct to create and an instinct to destroy, as in war. I don't pretend to understand Freud’s dark, perverse theory but something he said struck Einstein as encouraging, perhaps because Einstein focused more on the creative aspect of man rather that the destructive one, thinking that the creative instinct would some day overcome and harness the destructive one.

Freud's duel instinct theory of man was music to my ears because I've studied the contradictory nature of mankind. My conclusion is that man’s contradiction is part of life, a life force; humans can't exist, function or develop without that perversion, of contradicting themselves. And here, Feud was saying something similar. This also reminded me of the American economist Joseph Schumpeter who described capitalism as 'creative destruction'. That description was probably in reaction to the economic devastation capitalism wrought during the Great Depression. It was similar to Freud's reaction to war. Perhaps Schumpeter got this idea from Freud, or Friedrich Nietzsche who wrote about it before. Was capitalism similar to war?

Overall, Wars have become a thing of the past, especially between nations. Wars have become untenable and too destructive, as the world learned from two world Wars in the 20th century. Ironically, we have Einstein partly to thank for that development because of his discovery in physics, which led to the development of the ultimate weapon of destructive, the atomic bomb. The power of the atomic bomb was so destructive, as witnessed in the dropping of two of them on Japan at the end of WW2, that instead of becoming a weapon of choice it became a weapon for deterring War, as it did during the Cold War that occurred between the two super powers of the time, the U.S and the U.S.S.R. Perhaps Einstein foresaw this development as changing human attitude towards War. For this reason he may have seen Freud’s letter as encouraging because he felt that in time Man would lose his appetite for War as the weapon he helped created became potentially more and more devastating.

As war among nations declined capitalism’s prominence in the world rose. I don’t think this is a coincidence. Capitalism, apart from becoming the chief economic engine of mankind, became the foremost outlet and main envelopment of mankind’s two powerful driving instincts, creativity and destruction, as the economist Schumpeter identified. Capitalism harbored both instincts but in a more peaceful and productive manner than war. Had capitalism become the new war?

Wars were, unfortunately, once essential for reforming and shaping the world. Wars have removed many of mankind’s intransigencies and ironically have brought a unity to the world. But in the end war's destruction capability became too great, outweighed any gains they might have produced. However, without war as a means of world reform or as a manifestation of the destructive tendencies of man, mankind had to find another outlet for releasing its destructive tendencies. Man's inherent destructive nature had to be channeled elsewhere, into a less destructive but more productive means. This truly represents a paradigm shift. It came in the form of capitalism. Capitalism to my mind is the alternative to war. It also harbors a destructive nature as Schumpeter had observed but it also harbors the creative tendencies of mankind. Moreover, with its creative/destruction it is also the harbinger of the change and reform that is essential for mankind's survival, so that it remains vital without destroying itself. Even though capitalism does uproot lives and communities, as a form of change it is more desirable and much easier to stomach than war. So, capitalism is not only our chief provider it is also the chief catalyst for essential social reform.

Capitalism has now become worldwide, through the auspices of globalization. In hand with globalization it has united the world in a common activity and transcended the tribalism in the world that often led to wars. It has created a network and interdependence between nations that has defused the possibility of war between them. Capitalism has toned down and restructured the destructive nature of man so it is more bearable than war. Nevertheless, capitalism understands that a measure of destruction, in the form of competition and obsolescence, is still necessary to keep the world alive and awake. Its destructive, disruptive aspect is essential to keep mankind vital, innovative and agile, so that it has a future.

The economist Joseph Schumpeter labeled capitalism as 'creative destruction'. Creative destruction is a form of revolution. Mankind needs a certain level of revolution and reform to remain vital. War is no longer an option in that pursuit. But capitalism is.