Where the Bourgeois Virtues Are Found
It's not the halls of power.
Economic historian Deirdre McCloskey has just published the second volume of her multivolume look at the history of capitalism and its relationship to the “bourgeois virtues.” What she means by the latter are the basic virtues of the middle class, from prudence to love to justice. What makes this approach interesting is that critics of capitalism have long suggested that there were very few virtues associated with the bourgeoisie, mostly because capitalism itself requires and encourages what they saw as the unvirtuous behavior related to greed and self-interest.
In the first volume McCloskey convincingly argues that market relationships civilize us and lead us to treat one another, especially strangers, with openness and kindness, which was previously unknown in history. In the words of economic anthropologist Paul Seabright, markets turn strangers into “honorary kin.”
Markets do this because they encourage us to treat others as equals in that we approach them, especially strangers, most often as traders. They have rights to their property, we have rights to ours, and those rights limit the ways we can interact. But they leave exchange available as a way to get the things we want. The mutuality and reciprocity of exchange both require and encourage us to treat one another humanely, with justice, and as equals. In other words, markets lead us to treat strangers as fully human.
Contrast this with the way the State operates. Think about your interactions with agents of the government. By the very nature of what they do and your relationship to it, that interaction can never be one of equals. All such interactions are based on inequalities in power not reciprocity. The agent of the State ultimately has power over you and can use it to bend your actions to his or her will. This is very different from the reciprocity and humanity of the marketplace. From the IRS to the TSA to the police to the border patrol, the essence of the State’s relationship with you is domination and hegemony — not equality, contract, and exchange.
Compare and Contrast
To see this vividly, consider what happened to a colleague of mine last week. He is not a U.S. citizen but has the legal right to live and work in the country. He had to travel across the Canadian border to drop a relative at the airport. Crossing into Canada and again on his return he was subject to lengthy harassment by border guards of both countries, including verbal intimidation, scattering of his citizenship papers, and various threats to bar him from returning to the United States because they couldn’t figure out his status and his paperwork. He described the interaction as “humiliating.” He could feel the power of the State.
Compare that to the other interesting part of his trip. His car broke down in Canada, requiring it to be towed to a local Volvo dealer in a sparsely populated area. Not only did the Canadian Automobile Association respond quickly and politely to his call, but its agent also gladly towed him to a Volvo dealer, presumably one the agent was familiar with. However, my colleague was concerned about being taken advantage of. After all, information differences are common in such situations, opening the possibility of opportunistic behavior; this was made even worse by the likelihood he’d never be back to that dealer: Reputation wasn’t an issue. But despite this clear opportunity, the dealership treated him honestly, completing the repair in about an hour at a very reasonable price.
More interesting is that my colleague struck up a conversation with the service manager while he waited, comparing stories about their young children and extended families. My colleague said that when he left he felt like he had made a friend. That’s a far cry from what he felt after both stops at the border.
Sure the Volvo dealer wanted the business, but faced with a perfect opportunity to take advantage of a stranger, the staff made him feel welcome and comfortable — they made him feel human. He became, for that short time, honorary kin. It was the bourgeois virtues in action.
The next time someone tries to tell you that markets are dehumanizing and that we need government regulation to prevent people from treating each other like mere objects, you might share my colleague’s story.
***
I’d like to note that last week marked the first anniversary of this column. I thank all of you who have continued to read and enjoy it, “liked” it on Facebook, commented on it here, and sent me email about it. It’s been incredibly fun and challenging for me, and I intend to continue it as long as the fine folks at FEE will have me. Thanks again for reading.
Comment by jude on 11 November 2010:
You make a very good case, but, and maybe you can tell me why: The example of a friendly social security lady who was very friendly and had me signed up in minutes; vs, what seems to be an increasing degradation in private services,such as garages and restaurants where there seems to be a tendacy to treat custumers in the manner that you portray for government workers. In a small town the entrepreneur must leave his attitude the second he opens shop. In metro areas? What with chains and larger stores: Who cares?
Comment by Ed Holden on 11 November 2010:
The great thing about restaurants, garages and such is that you can (usually) take your business elsewhere if you are unsatisfied. You can also complain if you care to invest the time. I’m sure there are many friendly and able government employees but you don’t have a choice when faced with dissatisfaction, unless you are willing and allowed to move to a place with a different, and perhaps more satisfying government. Even then, you won’t have any options other than moving if you are not happy with your government or the services it provides.
Comment by George Schwappach on 11 November 2010:
I can’t speak for Jude’s life experiences, but mine are far different. I have always enjoyed being a customer to business because, as I so often tell them, “The customer is king”.
Some years ago, on a business trip to Seattle, the airline lost my bags. The client directed me to a store I had never been to, Nordstrom’s. They treated me very well and personally, helping me select shirts, slacks and a jacket. What was most amazing was when I returned to the store a month later on my second trip. That clerk remembered my name, knew my size and my preferences (I later learned that they kept cards on all their customers). Her personal approach made some good sales that day. It was no surprise that a company with this approach to customer service would grow and thrive.
Perhaps Jude should consider dropping her service contracts that have forgotten that she is king. I know that she will find better service and probably better prices switching to those companies who value her business.
George Schwappach
Comment by Justin on 11 November 2010:
Jude: It is true that you will find friendly people that work for the government (some people are just friendly by nature). However, even in large corporations in metro areas need to work on customer service. True, because of the large population there is a buffer for customer turnover, but ultimately everything comes down to customer service.
I work for one of the largest hotels in the world, and just today had a meeting with one of the owners. The main topic: customer service and how we can improve it. This is in a community where repeat business is largely nonexistent, so why would the owners be concerned about making the customer happy as long as they pay? Because it helps with reputation.
Comment by Donald M. Coder on 14 November 2010:
Friendly or not, government agents are driven by edict and are salaried without regard for services rendered. They have no product to sell, they only obey laws. Last week a friend of mine appeared at a hotel where she had a reservation and was denied a room because she had only a photocopy of her passport and the real passport was held in another government office. Government edict demanded the real passport. All hotels denied a room and she spent three nights sleeping in McDonald’s and JFK restaurants where the businesses kindly helped the foreigner in need. When you turn your life over to government employees the result is often misery and sometimes much worse. If you have freedom to utilize a business you give someone the opportunity to provide service, earn a reward, and win a friend.
Comment by พลาสติก on 22 January 2011:
hey nice blog my website about green a world and need to join your blogroll please email to me if you like to exchange a link with me. thank
Pingback by Some Links on 21 June 2011:
[...] Price reviews Deirdre McCloskey’s Bourgeois Dignity.… as does Steve Horwitz and Andy [...]
Pingback by Some Links | Daily Libertarian on 21 June 2011:
[...] Price reviews Deirdre McCloskey’s Bourgeois Dignity.… as does Steve Horwitz and Andy [...]
Pingback by The Bourgeois Virtues and Consumer Ethics | The Freeman | Ideas On Liberty on 3 August 2011:
[...] an earlier column I talked about Deirdre McCloskey’s work on the “bourgeois virtues.” McCloskey argues that [...]
Comment by New England Patriots Plan on 4 February 2012:
Hello there, simply become aware of your own website through Google, and found that it is truly educational. I’m going to watch out for brussels. I will be grateful for people who carry on this later on. Plenty of people will likely be achieved positive results out of your composing. Cheers!
Comment by Healthy Eating on 7 February 2012:
Hey, I think your site might be having browser compatibility issues. When I look at your website in Safari, it looks fine but when opening in Internet Explorer, it has some overlapping. I just wanted to give you a quick heads up! Other then that, awesome blog!
Trackback by stop spam plugin on 7 February 2012:
Valuable wordpress plugin…
[...]we came across a cool site that you might enjoy. Take a look if you are looking for a way to clean your blog from spam links.[...]……