For a considerable time, we are witnessing some panic in the financial sector, which has slowly but steadily spread its tentacles to other fields. Starting in the US - the land of the free entrepreneurial spirit - one could argue that it has the rest of the world in its grip. True, here and there we see the stock markets ending in the plus range, but it is still a brittle situation.
Why writing about the financial crisis, when my biggest chunk of work is related to music and culture? Not just because culture needs money as well (as does everything in life). For decades, we have discussions on financing culture, and especially; who has the responsibility for culture?
Culture is, generally speaking, an aspect of society. We can look at it from an angle where national, traditional, therefore a part of our own identity. When approaching it from the point of view that it is a mere luxurious form of entertainment, it appears to be perhaps obsolete. Whichever way we take it; the society itself as a group is involved some way or another.
Society has gone a long way of evolution; starting at a tribe-level, most people still had to be multi-functional in order to survive as a group. In more complex societies - as is ours nowadays - most of us have specialised functions: With a few exceptions, we all have just one job and have delegated other services to others.
While we have ever since the Middle Ages delegated activities like keeping order (police), protecting against an enemy (army), ruling (politicians), the trend since the industrial revolution has become such, that we would preferably move away from state intervention (Laissez-faire). We have slowly made acquaintance with words like "Corporate Social Responsibility" and even "Corporate Cultural Responsibility," where enterprises slowly begun financially supporting hospitals, welfare programs or sponsor orchestras. Indeed a true sign of less State and more enterprises in our every day life.
Interestingly enough, the Bush administration, as a staunch supporter (if not the most staunchest ever) of free entrepreneurship and withdrawal of government involvement into economics, has suddenly pumped in billions and billions of dollars in order to save banks from collapsing.
Is this thus an implicit sign, that free economics has exceeded its borders (again: starting at the very centre of free market economy - Wall Street) proving that it was just a huge bubble, and where suddenly we became alarmingly aware of the fact (including the Bush administration), that government (state) is still the main responsible for society?
The main question in my mind, and I would very much appreciate to receive your comments on who do you think is in fact ultimately responsible for maintaining culture as an integral part of society: Politics or Companies?
MS
Why writing about the financial crisis, when my biggest chunk of work is related to music and culture? Not just because culture needs money as well (as does everything in life). For decades, we have discussions on financing culture, and especially; who has the responsibility for culture?
Culture is, generally speaking, an aspect of society. We can look at it from an angle where national, traditional, therefore a part of our own identity. When approaching it from the point of view that it is a mere luxurious form of entertainment, it appears to be perhaps obsolete. Whichever way we take it; the society itself as a group is involved some way or another.
Society has gone a long way of evolution; starting at a tribe-level, most people still had to be multi-functional in order to survive as a group. In more complex societies - as is ours nowadays - most of us have specialised functions: With a few exceptions, we all have just one job and have delegated other services to others.
While we have ever since the Middle Ages delegated activities like keeping order (police), protecting against an enemy (army), ruling (politicians), the trend since the industrial revolution has become such, that we would preferably move away from state intervention (Laissez-faire). We have slowly made acquaintance with words like "Corporate Social Responsibility" and even "Corporate Cultural Responsibility," where enterprises slowly begun financially supporting hospitals, welfare programs or sponsor orchestras. Indeed a true sign of less State and more enterprises in our every day life.
Interestingly enough, the Bush administration, as a staunch supporter (if not the most staunchest ever) of free entrepreneurship and withdrawal of government involvement into economics, has suddenly pumped in billions and billions of dollars in order to save banks from collapsing.
Is this thus an implicit sign, that free economics has exceeded its borders (again: starting at the very centre of free market economy - Wall Street) proving that it was just a huge bubble, and where suddenly we became alarmingly aware of the fact (including the Bush administration), that government (state) is still the main responsible for society?
The main question in my mind, and I would very much appreciate to receive your comments on who do you think is in fact ultimately responsible for maintaining culture as an integral part of society: Politics or Companies?
MS
No comments:
Post a Comment