The Abbott Government's abolition of the price on carbon was part of its agenda to remove or weaken regulation that is thought to place a burden on business. Aside from the carbon tax, much of the Coalition's legislative program gives priority to capital over human need. The removal of important elements of the previous government's increased protection for consumers seeking financial advice is an example.
It is significant that the Abbott Government has a popular mandate to wind back its predecessor's policies that promoted social inclusion. This is despite the fact that many of the new Government's moves are clearly contrary to the common interest of the Australian people. For instance the mining super profits tax — which it is set to abolish — was designed to direct a proportion of the revenue from the nation's mineral wealth from large, predominantly foreign owned corporations, back to the common good of the Australian people. But the Australian people apparently want the big miners to keep their super profits.
Why? One possible answer lies in the symbolic value of business entrepreneurship. This is promoted as a good that trumps others, including — and especially — the social good. The social good has even been demonised, with welfare assistance depicted as the defining characteristic of the 'age of entitlement' that must be ended.
The glorification of business entrepreneurship has quite a bit of history, with the philosophy of the 'self made man' that came to dominate life in the United States and spread to other countries of the world, particularly in East Asia. Until now Australians have been proud to think of their nation as the land of the fair go, but it seems we've been won over by the promise of individual prosperity.
The culture of business entrepreneurship is difficult to avoid because it is linked to the globalisation of financial capital. But most especially, it dominates our education system, which must prepare young people to participate in the market economy. Future generations are likely to be indifferent, or even hostile, to the common good.
This was the scenario depicted earlier this month by Fr Benny Juliawan of the Jesuit Conference of Asia-Pacific, who was a keynote speaker at the Jesuit education colloquium in Sydney.
'School management, curricula and the general atmosphere in society idealise an entrepreneurial subject which revolves around discourses of competition and enterprise ... This underlying discourse of entrepreneurship redefines traditional values such as freedom and empowerment in a highly individualised sense.'
Juliawan believes the talents and personalities of today's students are geared toward joining a profession that will fulfil the material aspiration of the middle class, and that there is a serious shortcoming in the entrepreneurial self that is crafted through our education system.
The energy and focus of the activity of creating wealth is in itself admirable. But social — rather than business — entrepreneurship promises a better world. Business entrepreneurs measure performance in terms of financial profit and return, while social entrepreneurs offer profits for society and not just themselves.
A good role model for aspiring social entrepreneurs is the Jesuit educated Australian rooftop solar pioneer Danny Kennedy, who featured on ABC1's 4 Corners two weeks ago. To realise his ambitions he had to leave his home country and settle in the US, where paradoxically he has discovered there is more appetite for social entrepreneurship than there is in egalitarian Australia. That's because it ultimately makes good business sense.