It's time to cultivate the good life
Richard Reeves Monday July 7, 2003 The Guardian
John Maynard Keynes made four predictions in his essay Economic Possibilities for our Grandchildren, published in 1930. First, within a century or so "the standard of life in progressive countries [would] be between four and eight times as high as it is today". Second, this would mean the "economic problem" would have effectively been solved - and more growth would be of marginal concern to well being.
Third, the transition from a growth-pursuing culture would be difficult: he regarded "with dread" the necessary readjustments of the "habits and instincts of the ordinary man, bred into him for countless generations. Must we not expect a general nervous breakdown?" Finally he argued "those peoples who can keep alive and cultivate the art of life will be able to enjoy the abundance when it comes".
In each case Keynes was prescient. His macroeconomic forecast was, if anything, a little conservative: GDP per head in Britain is already four times what it was in 1930 and it seems much more likely than not that growth will continue in similar vein for the next 27 years.
And there are clear signs the levels of affluence already reached represent a solving of the economic problem. There is plenty of empirical evidence, for example, that life satisfaction in more affluent nations is no longer correlated with economic growth, so progress, in terms of happiness, is no longer an economic but a social issue.
(Two caveats are important here: for most of the world's population in the developing world, wealth creation remains a vital engine of wellbeing. Even in richer nations, poor people can be made happier with modest amounts of extra money. And so the strict utilitarian case for redistribution is a no-brainer.)
We are now, then, in the difficult transitional phase which Keynes anticipated. And while a "general nervous breakdown" might be an overstatement, a quick survey of episodes of road rage, rising incivility, hurry sickness and poor mental health suggests that our affluence co-exists with considerable anxiety.
The population of the USA, where economic motivations are even more deep-seated, is becoming less happy over time, while most of social democratic Europe is doing better in the happiness stakes (the French and Belgians are an exception to the rule).
This lends some support to Keynes's fourth supposition about the importance of the arts of life as opposed to the science of economics. Some nations, it seems, are making better use of the "freedom from pressing economic cares to live wisely and agreeably and well".
A tick can be placed next to all four of the Keynesian prophecies. But there is little evidence of a general awareness that we have reached a new stage in our society's development. If anything, we seem to be more obsessed, both collectively and individually, with the pursuit of income, profits, productivity, competitiveness and growth. We know from the research literature that friendship, good family relations and learning are now more associated with life satisfaction than money.
But having failed thus far to wean ourselves of the accumulation habit, to throw away the success benchmarks calibrated with pound signs, we rush around competing for goods that offer little to our own life satisfaction - and then wonder why we're frustrated. Having reached our current level of affluence, further material gain is valuable only in as much as it lifts our position relative to others. But because everyone is engaged in the same game, the net result is no one feels better off.
Political leaders are further behind the curve than the rest of us. For an example of the wrong-headedness of current political priorities, look no further than Charles Clarke. At just the point in economic history when we need to be cultivating the arts of life, we have an education secretary who sees schools and universities as training camps for UK employers.
Last week's report showing the sluggish take-up of citizenship education shows even this modest attempt to broaden the curriculum is gaining little traction. Yet if any subjects should be compulsory until the age of sixteen, they are philosophy, music, politics, creative writing.
Both left and right have, for different reasons, recently steered clear of articulating the contours of a good life. And the notion of promoting happiness is still treated with disdain in most political circles. The view that the market provides the scope for people to decide their own version of a good life - the real meaning of "there is no such thing as society" - has now taken root in Labour soil.
But this each to their own view will no longer suffice. The dynamics of consumption, relative income comparisons and the seeking of status are condemning us all to run a race that has no winners. There is a clear role for public policy is helping to manage the transition from the pursuit of economic goals which have served us so well in the past to the arts of life which will do so in the future.
The abundance has come but we are not especially enjoying it. This is because we continue to worship the God of economic science, rather than cultivating the arts of life. And this is where the real politics of progress must now take place.
In Search of the Good Life by Richard Reeves is in the current issue of Renewal (www.renewal.org.uk)