In that article "no room to move", the author is pretty critical of free market capitalism. In her view art encourages us to belong to a "human community" but capitalism will always deploy have/have not relationships. I think this is a pretty naive fantasy of the art market, but I'm curious what you think about business and community, since I know that's key topic in your work.I keep thinking of this through a biological perspective. Should survival of the fittest be the model, or co-evolutionary networks? Do we follow competition or compassion? What are the short term and long term pros and cons? The changing nature of "community" makes this even more complicated. Should we be upset if a job is lost in Michigan but one is gained in China? How do we set the boundaries of us/them today: proximity? nationality? shared dna? shared values?Sorry, I didn't realize how many questions this would end up raising in me! It's a rich territory.
I believe capitalism can be a positive force for change. It all depends on who is in control and what their intentions are. This is why I was wary of Hantz. With one person controlling so much land in a single city, I would be surprised if altruism is a guiding factor.I guess I think that a hybridized model is the best, such as a for-profit cooperative, in which many owners determine what is best for the whole. This type of model harnesses the power of capitalism, but also has the built in checks and balances of the opinions of each individual involved.