23. Capitalism & Economics
I’m not an economics expert or a trained specialist, but I do know that these theories are far from sufficient, accurate, or appropriate when it comes to interpreting, governing, or understanding the real world. And honestly, I believe this is something most people already know. Still, in modern society, so many fields operate based on these economic logics that we end up repeating them like a mantra—pretending not to know what we actually do, simply because it’s the dominant logic.
The logic of profit in economics carries a kind of coercive power that ties directly to human instinct. People follow it almost naturally and instinctively. But the negative effects of this logic are always externalized—pushed outside the boundaries of the system.
Economic theory rests on assumptions like rational individuals, perfect information, and the market’s ability to self-regulate. But in reality, markets are flawed, information is incomplete, and people are emotional beings. When markets fail, responsibility is diffused and people tend to say, “That’s not my problem.” These overly simplistic assumptions mask structural issues, and society ends up operating on distorted standards. I know that many economists are aware of these limitations—and indeed, whole branches of modern economics work to address them—these more nuanced understandings often fail to reach public discourse or policy.
This economic logic—so often reduced to a poor translation of complex human behavior—has enormous influence across society. And that’s precisely why we must be cautious. Many of the things that make human society sustainable—care, community, immersed enjoyment, service, sacrifice—don’t show up in economic equations. These are seen as economically “worthless,” but that’s a structural distortion that actually undermines the foundation of society itself.
Capitalism and economics describe only a part of human reality. But mistaking that part for the whole has become one of today’s core social problems. We need to start asking questions about this structure again.