Michael Sandel: Why we shouldn't trust markets with our civic life

Translator: Benno Hansen Reviewer: Anders Finn Jørgensen

Here's a question we need to rethink together:

Der er et problem, vi nødt til at diskutere:

What should be the role of money

Hvilken rolle skal penge

and markets in our societies?

og markedet spille i vores samfund?

Today, there are very few things

I dag er der meget få ting,

that money can't buy.

som ikke kan købes for penge.

If you're sentenced to a jail term

Hvis man sidder i fængsel

in Santa Barbara, California,

i Santa Barbara, Californien,

you should know

skal I vide

that if you don't like the standard accommodations,

men ikke kan lide den almindelige indkvartering,

you can buy a prison cell upgrade.

kan man opgradere sin fængselscelle.

It's true. For how much, do you think?

Det er sandt. Hvad koster det, tror I?

What would you guess?

Hvad gætter I på?

Five hundred dollars?

Fem hundrede dollars?

It's not the Ritz-Carlton. It's a jail!

Det er ikke Ritz-Carlton. Det er et fængsel!

Eighty-two dollars a night.

82 dollars per nat.

Eighty-two dollars a night.

Toogfirs dollars per nat.

If you go to an amusement park

Hvis man tager i forlystelsespark,

and don't want to stand in the long lines

og ikke ønsker at stå i de lange køer

for the popular rides,

ved de populære forlystelser,

there is now a solution.

er der nu en løsning.

In many theme parks, you can pay extra

I mange forlystelsesparker kan du betale ekstra

to jump to the head of the line.

for at komme forrest i køen.

They call them Fast Track or VIP tickets.

De kalder dem Fast Track eller VIP-billetter.

And this isn't only happening in amusement parks.

Og det er ikke kun muligt i forlystelsesparker.

In Washington, D.C., long lines,

I Washington

queues sometimes form

er der undertiden lange køer

for important Congressional hearings.

til vigtige kongreshøringer.

Now some people don't like to wait in long queues,

Nogle mennesker kan ikke lide at vente i lange køer,

maybe overnight, even in the rain.

måske natten over, måske i regnvejr.

So now, for lobbyists and others

Så nu, for lobbyister og andre,

who are very keen to attend these hearings

der er meget ivrige efter at deltage i disse høringer,

but don't like to wait, there are companies,

men ikke kan lide at stå i kø,

line-standing companies,

er der stå-i-kø virksomheder,

and you can go to them.

man kan gå til.

You can pay them a certain amount of money,

Man betaler dem en vis mængde penge,

they hire homeless people and others who need a job

de ansætter hjemløse og andre, der har brug for et job,

to stand waiting in the line for as long as it takes,

til at stå i kø så lang tid, det tager,

and the lobbyist, just before the hearing begins,

og lobbyisten lige før høringen begynder,

can take his or her place at the head of the line

kan tage hans eller hendes plads forrest i køen

and a seat in the front of the room.

og få en plads forrest i salen.

Paid line standing.

Betalt kø-ståning.

It's happening, the recourse to market mechanisms

Brugen af markedsmekanismer,

and market thinking and market solutions,

markedstænkning og markedsløsninger

in bigger arenas.

sker i stor stil.

Take the way we fight our wars.

Se på den måde, vi kæmper vores krige.

Did you know that, in Iraq and Afghanistan,

Vidste du, at i Irak og Afghanistan

there were more private military contractors on the ground

var der flere private militære entreprenører

than there were U.S. military troops?

end amerikanske soldater?

Now this isn't because we had a public debate

Vi havde ingen offentlig debat om,

about whether we wanted to outsource war

hvorvidt vi ønskede at outsource krig

to private companies,

til private virksomheder.

but this is what has happened.

Men det var, hvad der skete.

Over the past three decades,

Gennem de sidste tre årtier

we have lived through a quiet revolution.

har vi oplevet en stille revolution.

We've drifted almost without realizing it

Vi er næsten uden at bemærke det

from having a market economy

gået fra at have en markedsøkonomi

to becoming market societies.

til at være et markedssamfund.

The difference is this: A market economy is a tool,

Forskellen er, at en markedsøkonomi er et værktøj,

a valuable and effective tool,

et værdifuldt og effektivt redskab

for organizing productive activity,

til at organisere produktiv aktivitet;

but a market society is a place where

men et markedssamfund er et sted,

almost everything is up for sale.

hvor næsten alt er til salg.

It's a way of life, in which market thinking

Det er en livsstil, hvor markedsøkonomiens tænkning

and market values begin to dominate

og værdier dominerer

every aspect of life:

alle aspekter af livet:

personal relations, family life, health, education,

venskaber, familieliv, sundhed, uddannelse,

politics, law, civic life.

politik, jura, borgernes dagligdag.

Now, why worry? Why worry about our becoming

Hvorfor bekymre sig? Hvorfor bekymre sig over at vi bliver

market societies?

et markedssamfund?

For two reasons, I think.

Af to grunde, tror jeg.

One of them has to do with inequality.

En af dem har at gøre med ulighed.

The more things money can buy,

Jo flere ting penge kan købe,

the more affluence, or the lack of it, matters.

jo mere betyder velstand eller mangel på samme.

If the only thing that money determined

Hvis det eneste penge gav adgang til

was access to yachts or fancy vacations or BMWs,

var lystbåde, dyre ferier eller BMW'ere,

then inequality wouldn't matter very much.

ville ulighed ikke betyde ret meget.

But when money comes increasingly to govern

Men når det i stigende grad koster penge

access to the essentials of the good life --

at få adgang til de grundlæggende elementer i et godt liv

decent health care, access to the best education,

anstændige sundhedsydelser, adgang til den bedste uddannelse,

political voice and influence in campaigns --

politisk indflydelse

when money comes to govern all of those things,

når penge styrer alle disse ting,

inequality matters a great deal.

betyder ulighed en hel del.

And so the marketization of everything

Så markedsgørelse af alt

sharpens the sting of inequality

forværrer effekterne af ​​ulighed

and its social and civic consequence.

og dens sociale og samfundsmæssige konsekvenser.

That's one reason to worry.

Det er én grund til at bekymre sig.

There's a second reason

Der er en anden grund

apart from the worry about inequality,

end at bekymre sig om ulighed,

and it's this:

og den er:

with some social goods and practices,

for nogle sociale goder og praksis gælder det

when market thinking and market values enter,

når markedstænkningens værdier komme ind i billedet

they may change the meaning of those practices

at det kan ændre betydningen af ​​denne praksis

and crowd out attitudes and norms

og fortrænge normer,

worth caring about.

der er værd at beskytte.

I'd like to take an example

Lad mig tage et eksempel

of a controversial use of a market mechanism,

på en kontroversiel brug af en markedsmekanisme,

a cash incentive, and see what you think about it.

et kontant incitament, og se hvad I synes om det.

Many schools struggle with the challenge

Mange skoler er udfordrede

of motivating kids, especially kids

med at motivere børn, især børn

from disadvantaged backgrounds, to study hard,

fra dårligt stillede miljøer til at studere flittigt,

to do well in school, to apply themselves.

til at klare sig godt i skolen, til at engagere sig.

Some economists have proposed a market solution:

Nogle økonomer har foreslået et markedsløsning:

Offer cash incentives to kids for getting good grades

Tilbyd børn kontante incitamenter for at få gode karakterer,

or high test scores

eller høje prøveresultater

or for reading books.

eller for at læse bøger.

They've tried this, actually.

De har faktisk prøvet det.

They've done some experiments

De har gjort forsøg i

in some major American cities.

nogle større amerikanske byer.

In New York, in Chicago, in Washington, D.C.,

I New York, Chicago, Washington DC,

they've tried this, offering 50 dollars for an A,

har de prøvet at tilbyde 50 dollars for et A,

35 dollars for a B.

35 dollars for et B.

In Dallas, Texas, they have a program that offers

I Dallas i Texas betaler de

eight-year-olds two dollars for each book they read.

otte-årige to dollars for hver bog, de ​​læser.

So let's see what -- Some people are in favor,

Lad os se -- Nogle mennesker er for

some people are opposed to this cash incentive

og nogle mennesker er imod dette kontante incitament

to motivate achievement.

til at motivere præstation.

Let's see what people here think about it.

Lad os se hvad folk herinde mener om det.

Imagine that you are the head of a major school system,

Forestil dig at du er leder af et større skoledistrikt,

and someone comes to you with this proposal.

og nogen foreslår denne løsning.

And let's say it's a foundation. They will provide the funds.

Og lad os sige det er en fond. De betaler.

You don't have to take it out of your budget.

Du behøver ikke at sætte det på dit budget.

How many would be in favor

Hvor mange ville være for

and how many would be opposed to giving it a try?

og hvor mange ville være imod at give det en chance?

Let's see by a show of hands.

Lad lave håndsoprækning.

First, how many think it might at least be worth a try

Først: hvor mange tror, ​​det i det mindste ville være et forsøg værd at se,

to see if it would work? Raise your hand.

om det kunne virke? Hånden i vejret.

And how many would be opposed? How many would --

Og hvor mange ville være imod?

So the majority here are opposed,

Så de fleste her er imod,

but a sizable minority are in favor.

men en betydelig minoritet er for.

Let's have a discussion.

Lad os tage diskussionen.

Let's start with those of you who object,

Lad os starte med dem, der er imod

who would rule it out even before trying.

og som udelukker at prøve.

What would be your reason?

Hvad er begrundelsen?

Who will get our discussion started? Yes?

Hvem vil sætte diskussionen i gang? Ja?

Heike Moses: Hello everyone, I'm Heike,

Heike Moses: Hej alle sammen. Jeg hedder Heike,

and I think it just kills the intrinsic motivation,

og jeg tror bare, ​​det dræber den indre motivation,

so in the respect that children, if they would like to read,

for børn der gerne vil læse,

you just take this incentive away

vil man bare tage denne motivation væk

in just paying them, so it just changes behavior.

og betale dem for at ændre adfærd.

Michael Sandel: Takes the intrinsic incentive away.

Michael Sandel: Tager det iboende incitament væk.

What is, or should be, the intrinsic motivation?

Hvad er, eller burde være, den indre motivation?

HM: Well, the intrinsic motivation

HM: Tjae, den indre motivation

should be to learn.

burde være at lære.

MS: To learn. HM: To get to know the world.

MS: At lære. HM: For at lære om verden.

And then, if you stop paying them, what happens then?

Hvad sker der så?

Then they stop reading?

Holder de så op med at læse?

MS: Now, let's see if there's someone who favors,

MS: Lad os nu se om der er nogen, der er for,

who thinks it's worth trying this.

som tror, ​​det er værd at prøve.

Elizabeth Loftus: I'm Elizabeth Loftus,

Elizabeth Loftus: Jeg hedder Elizabeth Loftus.

and you said worth a try, so why not try it

Du sagde “værd at prøve”, så hvorfor ikke prøve det?

and do the experiment and measure things?

Gøre forsøget og måle på det.

MS: And measure. And what would you measure?

MS: Og hvad ville du måle?

You'd measure how many --

Du vil måle hvor mange...

EL: How many books they read

EL: Hvor mange bøger de læste

and how many books they continued to read

og hvor mange bøger de fortsatte med at læse,

after you stopped paying them.

når man holdt op med at betale.

MS: Oh, after you stopped paying.

Aha, efter man holdt op med at betale.

All right, what about that?

Okay, hvorfor det?

HM: To be frank, I just think

HM: For at være ærlig synes jeg bare det er...

this is, not to offend anyone, a very American way.

ikke at fornærme nogen, en meget amerikansk tanke.

(Laughter) (Applause)

(Latter)(Bifald)

MS: All right. What's emerged from this discussion

MS: Okay. Diskussionen rejser

is the following question:

følgende spørgsmål:

Will the cash incentive drive out or corrupt

Vil et kontant incitament korrumpere

or crowd out the higher motivation,

eller fortrænge den dybere motivation,

the intrinsic lesson that we hope to convey,

den iboende lektie, som vi håber at formidle,

which is to learn to love to learn and to read

som er at lære at elske at lære og at læse for læsningens

for their own sakes?

egen skyld?

And people disagree about what the effect will be,

Og folk er uenige om, hvad effekten vil være,

but that seems to be the question,

men der synes at være den bekymring,

that somehow a market mechanism

at på en eller anden måde vil en markedsmekanisme

or a cash incentive teaches the wrong lesson,

eller et kontant incitament lære en forkerte lektie,

and if it does, what will become of these children later?

og hvis det gør, hvad skal der senere blive af disse børn?

I should tell you what's happened with these experiments.

Jeg skal sige jer, hvad udfaldet blev af disse forsøg.

The cash for good grades has had very mixed results,

Kontanter for gode karakterer har haft meget blandede resultater,

for the most part has not resulted in higher grades.

og har for det meste ikke resulteret i højere karakterer.

The two dollars for each book

De to dollars for hver bog

did lead those kids to read more books.

fik børnene til at læse flere bøger.

It also led them to read shorter books.

Det fik dem også til at læse kortere bøger.

(Laughter)

(Latter)

But the real question is,

Men det virkelige spørgsmål er,

what will become of these kids later?

hvad der skal blive af disse børn senere?

Will they have learned that reading is a chore,

Vil de have lært, at læsning er en opgave,

a form of piecework to be done for pay, that's the worry,

en form for akkordarbejde det er bekymringen

or may it lead them to read maybe for the wrong reason initially

eller kan det få dem til at læse af en måske forkerte grund i første omgang,

but then lead them to fall in love with reading for its own sake?

men så få dem til at forelske sig i læsning for læsningens skyld?

Now, what this, even this brief debate, brings out

Hvad selv denne korte debat bringer op,

is something that many economists overlook.

er noget, som mange økonomer overser.

Economists often assume

Økonomer antager ofte

that markets are inert,

at markedet er værdifrit

that they do not touch or taint the goods they exchange.

at de ikke rører eller påvirker de goder de udveksler.

Market exchange, they assume,

Handel, antager de,

doesn't change the meaning or value

ændrer ikke betydningen eller værdien af ​​de varer,

of the goods being exchanged.

der handles.

This may be true enough

Det kan være sandt nok,

if we're talking about material goods.

hvis vi taler om materielle goder.

If you sell me a flat screen television

Om du sælger mig et fladskærms-tv

or give me one as a gift,

eller giver mig et i gave,

it will be the same good.

vil det være den samme vare.

It will work the same either way.

Det vil virke på samme måde uanset.

But the same may not be true

Men det samme er ikke tilfældet,

if we're talking about nonmaterial goods

hvis vi taler om ikke-materielle goder

and social practices such as teaching and learning

og sociale praksisser så som undervisning og læring

or engaging together in civic life.

eller fællesskab i samfundslivet.

In those domains, bringing market mechanisms

På de områder kan markedsmekanismer

and cash incentives may undermine

og kontante incitamenter underminere

or crowd out nonmarket values and attitudes

eller fortrænge ikke markedsmæssige værdier og holdninger,

worth caring about.

der er værd at beskytte.

Once we see

Når vi ser,

that markets and commerce,

at markeder og handel,

when extended beyond the material domain,

når det spredes fra det materielle domæne til andre,

can change the character of the goods themselves,

kan ændre karakteren af selve varen,

can change the meaning of the social practices,

kan ændre betydningen af ​​sociale praksisser

as in the example of teaching and learning,

som i eksemplet med undervisning og læring

we have to ask where markets belong

er vi nødt til at spørge, hvor markedet hører hjemme

and where they don't,

og hvor det ikke gør det,

where they may actually undermine

hvor det rent faktisk kan underminere

values and attitudes worth caring about.

værdier og holdninger der er værd at beskytte.

But to have this debate,

Men for at tage denne debat

we have to do something we're not very good at,

er vi er nødt til at gøre noget, vi ikke er ret gode til,

and that is to reason together in public

og det er at ræsonnere sammen

about the value and the meaning

om værdien og betydningen

of the social practices we prize,

af ​​de sociale praksisser, vi værdsætter;

from our bodies to family life

fra vores kroppe til familielivet

to personal relations to health

til venskaber til sundhed til undervisning og

to teaching and learning to civic life.

læring til borgernes hverdag.

Now these are controversial questions,

Det er kontroversielle debatter,

and so we tend to shrink from them.

så vi har en tendens til at undvige dem.

In fact, during the past three decades,

I løbet af de seneste tre årtier,

when market reasoning and market thinking

hvor markedsræsonnement og markedstænkning

have gathered force and gained prestige,

har samlet kraft og fået prestige,

our public discourse during this time

er vores offentlige diskurs

has become hollowed out,

blevet udhulet,

empty of larger moral meaning.

tømt for større moralsk betydning.

For fear of disagreement, we shrink from these questions.

Af frygt for uenighed har vi skyet disse konflikter.

But once we see that markets

Men når vi ser, at markederne

change the character of goods,

ændrer karakteren af nogle varer,

we have to debate among ourselves

er vi nødt til at diskutere

these bigger questions

disse større spørgsmål

about how to value goods.

om værdsættelse af varer.

One of the most corrosive effects

En af de mest nedbrydende virkninger

of putting a price on everything

ved at sætte en pris på alting

is on commonality,

er på fællesskabet,

the sense that we are all in it together.

følelsen af at vi alle er i samme båd.

Against the background of rising inequality,

I kraft af den stigende ulighed fører

marketizing every aspect of life

markedsgørelsen af alle aspekter af livet

leads to a condition where those who are affluent

til en situation, hvor dem, der er velhavende,

and those who are of modest means

og dem, der har beskedne midler,

increasingly live separate lives.

i stigende grad leve adskilte liv.

We live and work and shop and play

Vi lever og arbejder og shopper og leger

in different places.

forskellige steder.

Our children go to different schools.

Vores børn går i forskellige skoler.

This isn't good for democracy,

Det er ikke godt for demokratiet.

nor is it a satisfying way to live,

Det er heller ikke en tilfredsstillende måde at leve på

even for those of us who can afford

selv for dem af os, der har råd til

to buy our way to the head of the line.

at købe en plads forrest i køen.

Here's why.

Jeg skal forklare hvorfor.

Democracy does not require perfect equality,

Demokrati kræver ikke total lighed,

but what it does require

men det kræver,

is that citizens share in a common life.

at borgerne tager del i et fælles liv.

What matters is that people

Det afgørende er, at folk

of different social backgrounds

fra forskellige sociale baggrunde

and different walks of life

og forskellige samfundslag

encounter one another,

møder hinanden,

bump up against one another

støder ind i hinanden

in the ordinary course of life,

i hverdagen,

because this is what teaches us

fordi det er hvad, der lærer os

to negotiate and to abide our differences.

at forhandle og acceptere vores forskelligheder.

And this is how we come to care for the common good.

Og det er sådan vi kommer til at drage omsorg for det fælles bedste.

And so, in the end, the question of markets

Når det kommer til stykket er spørgsmålet om markedet

is not mainly an economic question.

er det ikke først og fremmest et økonomisk spørgsmål.

It's really a question of how we want to live together.

Det er i virkeligheden et spørgsmål om, hvordan vi ønsker at leve sammen.

Do we want a society where everything is up for sale,

Ønsker vi et samfund, hvor alt er til salg,

or are there certain moral and civic goods

eller er der visse moralske og samfundsmæssige goder,

that markets do not honor

som markederne ikke værdsætter

and money cannot buy?

og penge kan ikke købe?

Thank you very much.

Mange tak.

(Applause)

(Bifald)