Liberalism as a Non-Metaphysical Ideology

The call to share was expressed only with conscientiousness in Bill Gates' words, and with both conscientious and religious grounds in his words suggesting a good memory after death, after Erdogan repeated an anonymous statement that “shrouds have no pockets”. However, Hayek (1899-1992) is of the opinion that it is not possible for anyone to know what is best, and therefore he is in favor of each individual trying what he believes he can do. Therefore, it is also against calling the market to adhere to the ethical values of society. Thus, he is in the position of one of the competent representatives of liberalism, which is described as “ideology without metaphysics” by some.

Atilla Yayla, who seems to think like Hayek, while opposing the President's call for conscientious and religiously based sharing, says, "People carry out their economic behaviors – production, saving, consumption, investment, etc. – according to the complainants” and that an entrepreneur “already” gives a share of the revenue to the workers he employs, otherwise he cannot keep them in business. However, employers generally do not have such a concern for workers, except for a few jobs that require very specific knowledge and skills. Because they do not have difficulty in finding people to work. The reason for the determination of the “minimum wage” by the state is the merciless temperament of capitalism. On the other hand, not only is the ambition to earn a lot, but metaphysical values are also human.

Hayek, whose influence is noticed in both authors, believes, just like other classical liberals, that if he is freed, the necessary order will be created in the market. However, the search for the necessary order in liberal countries' markets has not been driven by a free market understanding, but as a result of the rebellious actions of the workers throughout history, and the interventions in the form of work interruptions with strikes that became legal over time. Otherwise, it is not that the employer who has the ambition to earn a lot, which Yayla mentions in his article as “the result of the nature of man and the ecosystem in which he lives”, is “already” sharing.

In short, neither the liberal philosopher Herbert Spencer's “laissez faire laissez passer” logic with connotation of “social Darwinism” nor Adam Smith's “invisible hand” hope could lead capitalism to sharing. It is the visible and struggling hand of civil society that directs it to share, even if it is insufficient. Reducing working hours to a tolerable level, increasing wages, and establishing social security rights are all thanks to the struggle of that hand against capitalism throughout history.

That struggle took place in some cities of France in July and August 1999, after the meat imported from the USA turned out to be hormonal; In December of the same year, while protesting the World Trade Organization with slogans such as “No to free trade, yes to honest trade!”, in the city of Seattle, USA, there were clashes with the police from time to time; It was continued in Davos in January 2000, in Prague in September of the same year, in Quebec in April 2001 and in other cities of the West on different dates, as the “Seatle spirit”. Then, the global crisis that started in 2008 continued for years, and Bil Gates's first use of the phrase “I hate capitalism” was in 2008, when that crisis began. As a continuation of that crisis, demonstrations with the slogan “Occupy Wall Street” were held in 2011 against the injustice in income distribution, targeting the region where the financial centers in the USA are located, which started in Spain and spread to other countries. The organizers of those demonstrations also announced that they would invite everyone in Western countries to withdraw their money from banks. In the end, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Mun had to call, “Listen to Wall Street.” This means that the practices of capitalism, not only in history but also in the 21st century, have caused problems, but they were partially restrained after great reactions. Despite this, it still seems unrealistic to say that the capitalists "already" share their revenues with the workers.  

Despite all this, Birol Kovancılar, who continues to defend capitalism like Atilla Yayla, states that the increase in our standard of living in the last century is due to capitalism, in response to Ali Koç's statement that the above-mentioned capitalism should disappear, implying that there is no other alternative. Margaret Thatcher, who was the British Prime Minister at the time of the collapse of the USSR, declared capitalism as “There is no alternate”. However, an alternative philosophical view is developing, which tries to restrain capitalism, albeit within Western secular liberalism. Although the classical liberal Hayek accused him of being "outside of real liberalism", that view is called “social liberalism” and “political liberalism” by both its members and non-partisans. While this view is also metaphysical, it is not as indifferent to metaphysics as classical liberals.

Another Liberalism

John Rawls (1921-2002), one of the most influential philosophers of political liberalism, particularly emphasizes the difference principle and, contrary to Hayek, recommends that different should try to be beneficial to each other. In this way, he wants the advantaged to object to an application that will not benefit the disadvantaged in the society. Thus, it considers it appropriate to support the disadvantaged to a level that can be determined, and says that this can only be possible by sharing financial opportunities with them within the framework of a measure. Rawls also emphasizes that such justice is essential for cooperation between people and expresses it as "justice as fairness". Rawls should be right in this approach, because although the individual, as an employer or employee, thinks about himself first, since a person is a social creature, he should also consider social peace and be in solidarity with those who are different from himself. Rawls expresses this not with a materialistic-individualistic logic, but by addressing the emotional side of human beings such as "brotherhood, friendship".

In the meantime, it should be noted that Rawls, who says that all known belief systems are reasonable by political liberals, can easily give examples from religion and moreover Islam. Rawls cites the early periods of Islam as an example for those with differences of faith to live together. In that case, it is necessary to take a brief look at the principle that escaped Rawls's attention, which empowers the disadvantaged, that is, the economically weak, without being hostile to individual wealth in Islam. 

Capitalism vs Islam

As it is known, Islam has ordered that labor should be rewarded as a right “before the sweat of the worker dries up”. For those who are completely in need, it is stated that the poor have the right in the wealth of the rich, as a Qur'anic decree.

It is seen that that right (zakat) is more binding than Rawls's perspective it as a duty of brotherhood-friendship, since it is seen as a legal responsibility in Islam. That binding is the basis of the following words in the first sermon of the first caliph, Hazrat Abu Bakr: “The weak among you is deemed strong by me, until I return to them that which is rightfully theirs, insha Allah. And the strong among you is deemed weak by me, until I take from them what is rightfully (someone else’s), insha Allah.”

Conclusion

Not only thinking theoretically, but also looking at the results of the practices in history and today, it is understood that it will be for the benefit of humanity to bring to attention all kinds of political, economic, legal, moral, conscientious and religious explanations, provided that they are not hostile to personal wealth and employers, and then to try to end capitalism actually.

Just as it is unfair to see people chasing only material values, it is equally unfair to impose capitalism, which has many complainers from its supporters, as "there is no alternative", at least because it makes people look impotent. Even if there is no alternative to capitalism at the moment, it is worth looking for, and it should be that search that befits an intellectual.