A widespread misconception persists: that capitalism inherently erodes both social and ecological ethics. This view, however, warrants careful reconsideration. In fact, capitalism originated within a distinct ethical framework, deeply influenced by religious values, as Max Weber famously noted in his account of the Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.
Moreover, anecdotal evidence and contemporary observation suggest that developed capitalist societies often exhibit comparatively high levels of civic virtue. In the marketplace itself, ethical conduct is indispensable: economic exchange depends on trust, mutual accountability, and adherence to established norms. The idea that capitalism thrives on deceit overlooks the fact that bad actors are exceptions, not representatives of the system. Crooks and tricksters exist in every domain of life.
Crucially, capitalism is not a singular culture but a mechanism—one that operates across varied cultural landscapes. As a mechanism, capitalism requires certain embedded ethical practices, such as honesty, enforceable contracts, and trust among participants, for it to function efficiently. Yet, it remains just that: a mechanism. Its outcomes depend heavily on the societal, cultural, and institutional settings in which it is deployed. If a culture upholds vegetarianism, markets will predominantly cater to vegetarian demands. If a society values environmental stewardship, capitalism responds by supplying sustainable technologies and green alternatives. Conversely, if a culture sanctions exploitation, capitalism will likely facilitate it as well.
In this light, capitalism does contain its own operational ethics, but it largely mirrors the ethical and cultural orientations of the society it serves. The real question, then, is not whether capitalism corrupts ethics, but how societies choose to enable, guide, or restrain the mechanism it represents.
A parallel critique often levelled alongside capitalism is that the blind pursuit of nominal GDP growth contributes to the overexploitation of natural resources and the degradation of social values. But this concern, too, rests on a misunderstanding. Nominal GDP is not an ideological force—it is a neutral, comprehensive, and secular metric of economic activity. Far from being an engine of ethical erosion, it captures the breadth of legitimate human enterprise. Everything from producing solar panels to conducting yoga classes, from organic farming to education services, contributes to GDP. A teacher running a private tuition centre or a therapist charging for mental health counselling ethically adds to GDP, just as much as a factory producing goods.
Critics sometimes argue that a race for higher GDP leads nations to prioritise quantity over quality or to disregard environmental sustainability. Yet, once again, this overlooks the role of cultural values and public policy. A society with robust environmental norms and social safeguards will channel its GDP growth through green industries, ethical labour practices, and inclusive institutions. Nordic countries, for example, continue to post strong GDP growth while maintaining high standards of environmental care and social welfare. The metric itself is not the problem; rather, it is the societal framework that interprets and guides economic growth that truly matters.
GDP, in essence, reflects what society chooses to value and produce. If those values are ethical and sustainable, then growth amplifies them. If they are extractive or unjust, growth may well deepen the harm, but that is a failure of governance and culture, not of the metric or the capitalist mechanism.
In sum, both capitalism and GDP growth are often mischaracterised as inherently corrosive. In reality, they are tools, embedded within and shaped by the prevailing cultural, moral, and institutional structures. Rather than condemning these tools outright, the challenge is to infuse them with the ethical vision and civic responsibility we expect from any healthy society.
Niraj Kumar Jha
