Page 58 [58]
OCR
56 | Tue PnıLosorny or Eco-Porrriıcs we desire and receive and what we even mean by, say, recognition and contempt, are integral parts of the social order and cultural heritage, within the framework of which we are even capable of imagining ourselves as someone: as master or servant, parent or child, an individual fulfilling a given role successfully or not. Deprivation and satisfaction, poverty and wealth are therefore concepts that can only be interpreted within a given system, for who lacks and what they lacks are both creations of the network of connections that shape them. ‘This system-based approach leads not to the relativisation of the issue of poverty. On the contrary, it helps one discuss the issue in the real context of the of the social situation of the individual and, even more so, of the group. This situation does not necessarily correlate with the possession of goods and the indicators of consumption. Man does not have a fundamental need of something that could even be measured with such indicators. What he needs is 1. to be understood, recognised, treated with respect and helped by his peers, because in this case 2. he can feel secure and develop his abilities unhindered. 3. Consequently, he acquires the food, shelter, work and familial connections deemed appropriate in his social environment. 4. Therefore, he will probably continue to live and enjoy better health than someone who lacks these things. The causal relation between these four groups of the conditions of a good human life is empirically proven. Their lack makes life miserable. I use the word misery, because poor material conditions, in the everyday use of the term, do not in themselves necessarily impede welfare or a sufficient quality of life. On the other hand, vulnerability, exclusion, humiliation or the contempt of one’s peers can, in itself and its consequences alike, make anyone miserable. 2. The above view of poverty — that it is nothing else than the unsatisfied need for certain products — is ideological to the extreme: it makes possible the handling of poverty as an economical issue, as an anomaly that can be remedied by more production and/or a more just distribution. (According to this economy-centred approach, politics is in effect nothing else than the influence exercised by the holders of public power on the distribution of resources, i.e., on the economy.) It is an increasingly accepted assumption in late modernity that the social conflicts arising from the distribution are avoidable or will become so, as soon as the development of production technologies can ensure the unlimitedly bountiful production of goods and services, thus finally ensuring enough of everything for everyone. For the source of radical
