This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2013/jun/07/greed-is-good-well-almost

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Greed is good – well, almost. But it must not be the dominant thing Greed is good – well, almost. But it must not be the dominant thing
(4 months later)
The problem with bankers is that they are too greedy. That is the working assumption of a great deal of rightly outraged public opinion. It's a familiar analysis, though, actually, a surprisingly convenient one for the City, for it suggests that the problems of the past few years are more individual than structural – thus implying that nothing too much needs to change structurally. Apparently, if we had more moral (and less greedy) bankers, all would be well. Thus the new-ish CEO of Barclays, the impressive Antony Jenkins, will be sharing a platform with the archbishop of Canterbury on Wednesday at a sold-out St Paul's Cathedral. This sort of thing didn't happen a few years ago. City people such as Jenkins are now talking a lot about values and morality. But how convincing is it?The problem with bankers is that they are too greedy. That is the working assumption of a great deal of rightly outraged public opinion. It's a familiar analysis, though, actually, a surprisingly convenient one for the City, for it suggests that the problems of the past few years are more individual than structural – thus implying that nothing too much needs to change structurally. Apparently, if we had more moral (and less greedy) bankers, all would be well. Thus the new-ish CEO of Barclays, the impressive Antony Jenkins, will be sharing a platform with the archbishop of Canterbury on Wednesday at a sold-out St Paul's Cathedral. This sort of thing didn't happen a few years ago. City people such as Jenkins are now talking a lot about values and morality. But how convincing is it?
I recall a chat I had some years back with Professor Niall Ferguson on whether the financial crash of 2008 was generated by greed. His line was that this wasn't the real answer because greed is, and always had been, a part of the City. "Greed is to bankers as physical fitness is to footballers" was his throwaway comment. Initially, this struck me as a counsel of despair. But increasingly, I think it is half right.I recall a chat I had some years back with Professor Niall Ferguson on whether the financial crash of 2008 was generated by greed. His line was that this wasn't the real answer because greed is, and always had been, a part of the City. "Greed is to bankers as physical fitness is to footballers" was his throwaway comment. Initially, this struck me as a counsel of despair. But increasingly, I think it is half right.
There is a fascinating idea in the remarkable 13th-century Kabbalist text known as the Zohar. Moral evil, the author writes, is "always either something that becomes separated or isolated, or something that enters into a relation for which it is not made". Following this, I wonder whether the problem with greed is that it originates in a legitimate and perfectly natural aspect of our personality, but one that becomes cut off from the rest of us – almost disowned – thus developing an independent and dangerous life of its own.There is a fascinating idea in the remarkable 13th-century Kabbalist text known as the Zohar. Moral evil, the author writes, is "always either something that becomes separated or isolated, or something that enters into a relation for which it is not made". Following this, I wonder whether the problem with greed is that it originates in a legitimate and perfectly natural aspect of our personality, but one that becomes cut off from the rest of us – almost disowned – thus developing an independent and dangerous life of its own.
There is, of course, a proper place for ambition and success and, yes, even the desire for financial reward. It would be foolish and disingenuous to pathologise such things per se. The problem comes when such desire is separated from all the other things we want and value in life. The psychoanalyst Neville Symington writes: "The prime task is not to banish them [the greedy parts of our character] but, rather, to embrace them … the very act of linking them together changes their character – so, for instance, greed would become courage."There is, of course, a proper place for ambition and success and, yes, even the desire for financial reward. It would be foolish and disingenuous to pathologise such things per se. The problem comes when such desire is separated from all the other things we want and value in life. The psychoanalyst Neville Symington writes: "The prime task is not to banish them [the greedy parts of our character] but, rather, to embrace them … the very act of linking them together changes their character – so, for instance, greed would become courage."
If this is right, then the moral repugnance we feel about greed, and the subsequent desire to rid ourselves and our society of it, are a peculiar part of the problem, for it too easily allows greed an independent life – as Edward Hyde is allowed an independent life when banished from the company of the good Dr Jekyll. If, as Symington suggests, we own it and hold it closer, then we allow other aspects of our character to react to it, transforming it into something more benign and worthier.If this is right, then the moral repugnance we feel about greed, and the subsequent desire to rid ourselves and our society of it, are a peculiar part of the problem, for it too easily allows greed an independent life – as Edward Hyde is allowed an independent life when banished from the company of the good Dr Jekyll. If, as Symington suggests, we own it and hold it closer, then we allow other aspects of our character to react to it, transforming it into something more benign and worthier.
One difference between Victorian bankers, with all their noble ambition for society, and the modern variety is that modern bankers seem to have very little else in their lives. They work absurdly long hours and so develop less social or political hinterland. It's often a sad, alienated existence, marooned in front of a computer screen, in slavery to the mobile phone, and largely cut off from the rich diversity of human experience. The good banker allows the ingredients of greed, which we all possess, to form a chemical reaction with other interests, thus creating a useful hybrid. The bad banker, with little else in life, allows greed an independent existence. Better than always bashing the bankers for their greed, an emotion I entirely understand, we ought to be encouraging them to reconnect with the nobility of their profession – to recognise banking as a part of something much wider (which it is), and not just alienated numbers on screens or in pay packets.One difference between Victorian bankers, with all their noble ambition for society, and the modern variety is that modern bankers seem to have very little else in their lives. They work absurdly long hours and so develop less social or political hinterland. It's often a sad, alienated existence, marooned in front of a computer screen, in slavery to the mobile phone, and largely cut off from the rich diversity of human experience. The good banker allows the ingredients of greed, which we all possess, to form a chemical reaction with other interests, thus creating a useful hybrid. The bad banker, with little else in life, allows greed an independent existence. Better than always bashing the bankers for their greed, an emotion I entirely understand, we ought to be encouraging them to reconnect with the nobility of their profession – to recognise banking as a part of something much wider (which it is), and not just alienated numbers on screens or in pay packets.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.