Lauderdale Paradox

Actually Lauderdale is a city where include in South America. “Lauderdale Paradox” was alleged by the Conte of the Lauderdale; James Maitland. This theory deliberates the conflict between capitalist economic structure and ecological balance. He defines the ecological as a one fact of “public wealth”. Also “private property” is a necessity of capitalist economic system. “Private property” needs other demands to following from itself. That processing is feeds main hunger of capitalism. However If we evaluate ecological system like Maitland, Basic materials in nature like air, water etc. that people and also other species could be useful and convertible to “capital” for system. This convert could be materialized by making predicaments above ecological products (capitalist arguments defined these products as non-paying and joint user). For this paradox while enhancing the private property with using ecological products for gaining door to cycling capitalist system, Public wealth sets down with non accessibility to common basic researches. Let’s think about capitalist environment politics. Gas and oil are harmful to environment. Big companies like Shell, Total and BP use additive ingredients for reducing negative effects of these materials against earth. However oil prices with additive ingredients much more expensive that other oil/liter. Against to ostensive purpose of increasing environmental sensibility, new solutions of capitalist economic view just achieve gaining new “capital” and new “demands”. These new demands are putted on for the normalizing the balance of nature. Also Marxists theoretic and supporters claim that this normalization never comes because of capitalist hunger with restrictions or putting on new needs. Maybe Maitlend influenced from Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson put a “search a happiness” opposite the “private property” on United States Declaration of Independence.

How can we apply this paradox on Turkish Economy? In early era of Republic, Turkey has taken an old and poor economic heritage from Ottoman Legacy. Economy was based on agricultural also not enough developed. There are also poor industrial facilities on restricted areas. New government of Turkey was tended to transform economic system. Actually reforms that willing to made were coming from “Tanzimat” reforms. In 1929 economic crises stroked whole world. However USSR’s “State based economic system” did not influenced. One point holding economy could not allow the shortage. So Turkey influenced this policy and applied their economic system. Especially after WW2 world economic system was hit again. US was big supplier for most of countries. With Truman plan and Monroe Doctrine Europe and Turkey get foundations. Turkey’s economic plan turned from agricultural dominance to semi-industrial product based economy. With democrats supported “private property” and personal investments. Except a little governmental changes, we can see “3rd way-right wing” effects on economy till today. That capitalist view needs new demands and not gives a surplus welfare to public. “If you work hard you’d get richness”, principle gains a profit from every product (positive or negative pre and post effects). This fact symbolizes little bit ethical value of capitalist system. One main purpose is to get the personal wealth. Furthermore communal and free products of nature are tried to convert a product in market and we are forced to buy them. “Spring water”, “organic fruits and vegetables” are most popular examples of our economic markets in that case. Factories and workshops are main locomotives to development. However our economic system use protective (!) and environmental (!) senses to gain new capital. This paradox is suitable today’s economic situation of Turkey. For the breakthrough environmental accessibility like a natural right, Social justice in economic dispersion must be build by state politics. If agricultural production set up domination in economy, negative effects of productivity on natural sources can be reduced. Demand and supply curve must not be control by companies. State and government must manage this balance by their competence that comes from public for public wealth.