A Political Economy of Reorientation
New Theory and Policy for the Recovery
Western subjects are disoriented by systematic commercial manipulation of their preferences. Such manipulation affected the preferences of their forbears and the culture of their societies and its final outcome is that their actual preferences are biased to impulsiveness, materialism, competition and egocentrism. An indication of the disorientation is the distance between actual preferences and what the article defines as potential personal preferences. This distance measures the potential reorientation. A necessary condition for realizing that reorientation is the removal of the commercial bias in the manipulation of preferences. Therefore, the article proposes to institute a Sovereignty Fund, which enables citizens to neutralize the commercial bias in manipulation by promoting their non-commercial values and ambitions in ads which are as sophisticated as contemporary ads promoting consumer goods. Two other arrangements are proposed for securing and accelerating the process of reorientation. All three proposals are radically democratic. They can be implemented without removing or disrupting existing institutions.
Achterhuis H. ( 2003), Het rijk van de schaarste. Van Hobbes tot Foucault, Ambo, Amsterdam.
Agrawal A., Gans J., Goldfarb A. (2018), Prediction machines. The simple economics of artificial intelligence, Harvard Business Review Press, Boston.
Akerlof G.A., Schiller R.J. (2015), Phishing for phools. The economics of manipulation and deception, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Baran P.A., Sweezy P.M. (1966), Monopoly capital. An essay on the American economic and social order, Monthly Review Press, New York.
Barber B.R. (2007) Consumed. How markets corrupt children, infantilize adults, and swallow citizens whole, W.W. Norton, New York.
Beer S. (1974), Designing freedom, House of Anansi Press Limited, Toronto.
Beer S. (1983), The will of the people, “The Journal of the Operational Research Society”, vol. 34 no. 8, pp. 797-810.
Bowles S. (1998), Endogenous preferences. The cultural consequences of markets and other economic institutions, “Journal of Economic Literature”, vol. 36 no. 1, pp, 75-111.
Bregman R. (2019), Humankind. A hopeful history, Little, Brown and Company, New York.
CBS (Statistics Netherlands) (2019), https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/our-services/customised-services-microdata/microdata-conducting-your-own-research [09.06.2021].
Damasio A. (2010), Self comes to mind. Constructing the conscious brain, Pantheon Books, New York.
Dijksterhuis A. (2007), Het slimme onbewuste. Denken met gevoel, Bert Bakker, Amsterdam.
Edsall T.B. (2021), Democracy is weakening right in front of us. Is political technopessimism our new future? The New York Times, February 17, https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/17/opinion/digital-revolution-democracy-fake-news.html [09.06.2021].
Frank R.H., Cook P.J. (1996), The winner take-all society. Why the few at the top get so much more than the rest of us, Penguin Books, New York.
Frank R.H. (2021), The economic case for regulating social media. The core business model of platforms like Facebook and Twitter poses a threat to society and requires retooling, an economist says,
The New York Times, February 11, https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/11/business/social-media-facebook-regulation.html [09.06.2021].
Foer F. (2017), World without mind, Penguin Press, New York.
Freedom House (2021), Democracy under siege. Freedom in the world 2021. https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2021/democracy-under-siege [09.06.2021].
Galbraith J.K. ( 1998), The affluent society. 40th anniversary edition, Mariner Books, Boston.
Galbraith J.K. (2004), The economics of innocent fraud. Truth for our time, Penguin Books, London.
George D. (2001), Preference pollution. How markets create the desires we dislike, The University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.
Graeber D. (2011), Debt. The first 5000 years, Melville House Publishing, New York.
Hamilton C. (2004), Growth fetish, Pluto Press, London.
Hanson J.D., Kysar D.A. (1999a), Taking behavioralism seriously. The problem of market manipulation, “New York University Law Review”, vol. 74 no. 3, pp. 100-217.
Hanson J.D., Kysar D.A. (1999b), Taking behavioralism seriously. Some evidence of market manipulation, “Harvard Law Review”, vol. 112 no. 7, pp. 1420-1572.
Harari Y.N. (2017), Homo Deus. A brief history of tomorrow, Harper Collins, New York.
Harvey D. (2011), The enigma of capital (and the crisis of capitalism), Oxford University Press, London, New York.
Heimann E. (1964), History of economic doctrines. An introduction to economic theory, Oxford University Press, New York.
Hirsch F. (1976), Social limits to growth, Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA.
Hsu T. (2021), Ad agencies step away from oil and gas in echo of cigarette exodus, The New York Times, March 25, https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/25/business/media/climate-ad-agencies-fossil-fuels.html [09.06.2021].
Hyken S. (2017), Sixty-four percent of U.S. households have Amazon Prime, Forbes, June 17, https://www.forbes.com/sites/shephyken/2017/06/17/sixty-four-percent-of-u-s-households-have-amazon-prime/ [09.06.2021].
Jilani Z. (2020), Democrat or republican, on the big polarising issues, you actually agree, The Correspondent, https://thecorrespondent.com/234/democrat-or-republican-on-the-big-polarising-issues-you-actually-agree/12686942268-dac9aac6?pk_campaign=newsletter-login&pk_medium=Daily&pk_source=mail [09.06.2021].
Krugman P. (2021), The banality of democratic collapse, The New York Times, May 24, https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/24/opinion/republicans-donald-trump-loyalty.html [09.06.2021].
Laing R.D. (1960), The divided self. An existential study in sanity and madness, Penguin, Harmondsworth.
Lewis R.A., Rao J.M. (2013), On the near impossibility of measuring the returns to advertising, https://justinm rao.com/lewis_rao_nearimpossibility.pdf [09.06.2021].
Lewis R.A., Rao J.M. (2015), The unfavorable economics of measuring the returns to advertising, “The Quarterly Journal of Economics”, vol. 130 no. 4, pp. 1941-1973.
Lindstrom M. (2011), Brandwashed. Tricks companies use to manipulate our minds and persuade us to buy, Martin Lindstrom Company.
Malabou C. (2008), What should we do with our brains?, Fordham University Press, New York.
Marglin S.A. (2008), The dismal science. How thinking like an economist undermines community, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, London.
MarketLine (2019) Global advertising, MarketLine Industry Profile. https://www.reportlinker.com/p04826429/Global-Advertising-MarketLine.html [09.06.2021].
Martijn M., Frederik J. (2019), The new dot com bubble is here: it’s called online advertising, The Correspondent, https://thecorrespondent.com/100/the-new-dot-com-bubble-is-here-its-called-online-advertising/5421770200-71877de1 [09.06.2021].
Morozow E. (2019), Capitalism’s new clothes. Shoshana Zuboff's new book on “surveillance capitalism” emphasizes the former at the expense of the latter, The Baffler, February 14, https://thebaffler.com/latest/capitalisms-new-clothes-morozov [09.06.2021].
OECD (2020), Innovative citizen participation and new democratic institutions. Catching the deliberative wave, OECD Publishing, Paris.
Offer A. (2006), The Challenge of affluence. Self-control and well-being in the United States and Britain since 1950, Oxford University Press, New York.
Ovide S. (2021), The State House versus big tech. State and local governments are looking to assert more control over tech companies, The New York Times, February 16, https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/16/technology/the-state-house-versus-big-tech.html [09.06.2021].
Perrin N. (2019), Facebook-Google duopoly won’t crack this year, E-Marketer, November 4, https://www.emarketer.com/content/facebook-google-duopoly-won-t-crack-this-year [09.06.2021].
Posner E.A., Weyl E.G. (2018), Radical markets. Uprooting capitalism and democracy for a just society, Princeton University Press, Princeton, Oxford.
Romer P. (2019), A tax that could fix big tech. Putting a levy on targeted ad revenue would give Facebook and Google a real incentive to change their dangerous business models, The New York Times, May 6.
Rushkoff D. (2010) Life Inc. How the world became a corporation, and how to take it back, Vintage Books, London.
Sandel M.J. (2012), What money can’t buy. The moral limits of markets, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York.
Schor J.B. (1998), The overspent American. Why we want what we don’t need, Harper Perennial, New York.
Schor J.B. (2004), Born to buy, Scribner, New York.
Skidelsky R., Skidelsky E. (2012), How much is enough? Money and the good life, Other Press, New York.
Sloterdijk P. (2006), Zorn und Zeit. Politisch-psychologischer Versuch, Suhrkamp Verlag, Frankfurt am Main.
Swaab D.F. (2014), We are our brains. A neurobiography of the brain from the womb to Altzheimer’s, Random House, New York.
Taplin J. (2017), Move fast and break things. How Facebook, Google, and Amazon cornered culture and undermined democracy, Little, Brown and Company, New York.
Thaler R.H., Sunstein C.R. (2008), Nudge. Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness, Yale University Press, New Haven, London.
The Elephant in the Room. Evolution, Behavioralism, and counteradvertising in the coming war against obesity (2003), “Harvard Law Review”, vol. 116 no. 4, pp. 1161-1184.
The Guardian Editorial (2019), The Guardian view on Britain’s broken politics: a people’s assembly can heal the wounds, November 5.
Tufekci Z. (2016), Mark Zuckerberg is in denial, The New York Times, November 15.
Van Reybrouck D. (2016), Against elections. The case for democracy, The Bodley Head, New York.
Van Tuinen H.K. (2011), The ignored manipulation of the market. Commercial advertising and consumerism require new economic theories and policies, “Review of Political Economy”, vol. 23 no. 2, pp. 213-231.
Verhaeghe P. (2010), Het neoliberale gif. Het Vrije Woord, November, www.liberales.be/essays/neovergif [09.06.2021].
Verhoeven A.A.C., Watson P., de Wit S. (2018), Failing to pay heed to health warnings in a food-associated environment, “Appetite”, vol. 120, pp. 616-626.
Warzel Ch. (2019), If a $5 billion fine is chump change, how do you punish Facebook? A trivial fine would mean the government isn’t just deferential to Facebook, but that it doesn’t truly understand its power, “The New York Times”, April 26.
Wijnberg R. (2019a) The problem with real news, The Correspondent, https://thecorrespondent.com/22/the-problem-with-real-news-and-what-we-can-do-about-it/1192789444-250f48fa [09.06.2021].
Wijnberg R. (2019b), More divided than ever? The truth is we agree much more than we think we do, The Correspondent, https://thecorrespondent.com/197/more-divided-than-ever-the-truth-is-we-agree-much-more-than-we-think-we-do/10680887294-bebcbac1 [09.06.2021].
Wu T. (2017), The attention merchants. The epic struggle to get inside our heads, Atlantic Books, London.
Zuboff S. (2019), The age of surveillance capitalism. The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power, Profile Books Ltd., London.
Zuboff S. (2021), The coup we are not talking about. We can have democracy, or we can have a surveillance society, but we cannot have both, The New York Times, January 29, https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/29/opinion/sunday/facebook-surveillance-society-technology.html [09.06.2021].
The aim of CEREM is to make scientific work available in accordance with the principle of open access. The rules mentioned below are important, as they enable CEREM and its publisher, the WSB University in Wrocław, to distribute the scientific work to a wide public while complying with specific legal requirements, at the same time protecting the rights of the authors.
The author transfers to the WSB University in Wrocław, free of charge and without territorial limitations, with all proprietary copyrights to the said piece of work in the understanding of the act of 4th February 1994 on copyrights and derivative rights (Journal of Laws of 1994, no. 24, item 83, as amended) on an exclusivity basis, i.e. the rights to:
1. Make the piece of work in question available via the Digital Library established by the WSB University in Wrocław.
2. Produce, record and reproduce in multiple copies the piece of work using any techniques whatsoever, including printing, reprography, magnetic recording and digital processing, and particularly its reproduction by recording on CDs and similar data carriers,
3. Use fragments of the piece of work for promotional purposes in publications, promotional materials, the Internet and Intranet type networks managed by the WSB University in Wrocław.
4. Store the piece of work into computer databases managed by the WSB University in Wrocław.
5. Copy and reproduce the piece of work using photo-mechanic technologies other than those commonly known at the time of the signature hereof (photocopies, Xerox copies etc.),
6. Process the piece of work, transferring it into an electronic form, and distribute it on the Internet without limitations.