Everything for Sale and The Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism - Admission/Application Essay Example

The basic arguments, therefore, are based upon the notion that markets have their limits and the economic tasks performed by the government cannot be replicated by private markets. He also argues that private markets fail to engage in pure research and it’s the responsibility of the government to actually finance such research in order to allow private markets to conduct such research. (Lemann, 1997)

Daniel Bell’s book is based upon arguments that rather than creating individualism, modern capitalism has created a strong culture of standardization. Rather than focusing on creating individualism, modern capitalism has created stronger corporate bureaucracies which are as powerful as Church and state bureaucracies were.  According to Bell, this culture created by Capitalism raises the need for personal gratification for those who are successful and resultantly may not be good for overall work ethics in the society. Ultimately, this culture will invariably hurt the same work ethics which were responsible for the success of capitalism in the first place. Bell argues that capitalism’s very fundamental ethics has now turned against itself and there is an inherent contradiction within capitalism now. (Liu, 2010)

One of the key assumptions of both books is the capitalist system as a supreme form of economic organization. By forming a consensus on the assumption that capitalism provides the best form of economic organization in human society, both the others argue about the instances or issues where markets have basically failed to deliver what was perceived by them.

Both the authors argue that as capitalism is heading ahead, it is creating a society that may not be a healthy and constructive society because it tends to create a wider level of shift into the same ideologies based on which it was founded. Both the authors however disagree on the point of intervention in the market. Kuttner views the large role of government in correcting the situation however, Bell only suggests that it is the culture that emerged as a result of the rise of capitalism that is creating these wider level ethical dilemmas in capitalist society.

Bell's arguments however are historically rooted in the Protestant roots of capitalism and how the early writers and theorists focused upon amalgamating individual aspects of human life with capitalism. This argument may not be relatively plausible because capitalism ultimately is a form of human organization and is based upon the notion of competition. In pursuit of competition, the erosion of moral and individual values may be one of the unwanted consequences.

Kuttner has also restricted his arguments on the role of government and how it can critically subdue the structures created by markets.

One of the common differentiating points between the two essays is the role of government and how it can intervene in it to correct the situations where markets fail. Both suggest that it is the government that can actually overthrow the unwanted consequences of the market. The overreaching of market institutions can be improved if the government can intervene however, both the authors have basically failed to take into account the inefficiencies and inherent weaknesses of the government itself. Both the works have been criticized on the pretext that government can have its own limitations and therefore leaving market corrections to the government may further worsen the situation rather than correcting it. The basic argument, therefore, is to let the markets work on their own rather than intervening in them either through government or religion. Another important criticism is the lack of empirical evidence behind the arguments presented in both books specifically against Bell’s work. It has been suggested that Bell has failed to provide empirical credibility to the cultural changes in the US due to capitalism.

It is, however, critical to note that historically government has been successful in fulfilling the gaps left behind by the market. On both the occasions when markets failed and created widespread economic decline i.e. Great Depression and Current economic recession, it was the government which has prevented the society from falling out. So the arguments of both the authors seem valid especially in situations where markets fail and when markets fail, the overall consequences to the society are far greater than the impact itself.