Answer

Moral Criticism of the Market

After reading Moral Criticisms of the Market and Making a Moral Case for Capitalism by Ken S. Ewert and Arthur C, Brooks respectively, I concur with their critique of the market. Both Brooks (2012) and Ewert (1989) justify the free market’s neutrality as they describe the free market as neither moral nor immoral. Ewert (1989) has defended the free market’s criticisms by Christian socialists as he illustrates the Christian moral view of the free market to be insufficient. Christians view the free market as a way of promoting selfishness which is against God’s will. They relate the abundance of commodities with increased desire hence resulting in individuality. He further protects the free market by mentioning the root cause of sin was man’s fall and not the market. He views the free market to be morally neutral, and it provides ways of generating wealth that can, in turn, used for charity.

Another criticism by Christians is that the free market is developed based on selfishness and materialism as too much weight put on an individual can be used in dominating the weaker and poorer members of the society. In defense of the free market, Ewert (1989) and Brooks (2012) state that materialism and greed are conditions arising from a person’s heart due to the urge of being part of the financial world regardless of whether the markets are free or not. Free markets enable one to have the liberty to choose and set their goals and priorities straight, and it does not dictate; therefore, the personal-indulgence of an individual is due to their own choice.

Markets cannot be blamed for our spending habits as we are fully responsible for our actions. This can be related to the Bible when God reprimands Adam for blaming the devil for his sin. Furthermore, economic power should be regarded as the power to please others, and it should not be compared to political power, which is highly feared.