Do we give up at this point? Or is it possible to expand our perspectives regarding assets and Worth? Do we emulate the work done by DeSoto, finding financial and legal leverage points that enable us to assign financial and societal value to the “soft” side of human Worth? Does this reconfiguration of Value and Worth require that we engage in processes of deep caring regarding the inherent value and welfare of other people? Do we recognize that this is not something we can do ourselves? Do we ask for assistance from our community? I would suggest this is the case and address these matters in the third essay on the Psychology of Worth, accompanying these first two essays.
While considering ways to address this “soft” side, it is also important to acknowledge the “downside” of indispensability and Worth. We must ask about the cost of being indispensably “Worthy.” High costs are found in the common struggle of many competent women (and some men), who find that they are “indispensable. They can’t free themselves from multiple demands. Being indispensable, they are called on to do too many things and to never say “no” to a request. With indispensability comes a loss of Freedom. Worth is acquired, but potentially at a cost.
Geographic expansion
From the early years of capitalism, there has been an emphasis on expanding operations (or at least wider distribution of products or services). New regions of one’s country or the entire world are envisioned. While most premodern organizations have strong roots in a specific geographic location (relying on informal local networks to establish reputation and working relationships), there is an inclination for the leaders of many capital-based organizations to not only increase the size of their existing operations but also set up shop in other locations. This yearning for geographic expansion of operations complements the desire for enlarging the parameters of markets being served.
As Thomas Friedman (2007) has persuasively noted, this has meant recent movement toward globalization and a “flat world.” In essence, a contemporary capitalist organization will often embrace a geographically expansionist goal that encompasses one or more of the following: a broadening of the market for products and services, inexpensive extraction of natural resources, recruitment of inexpensive labor from underdeveloped countries, and escape from tight environmental and labor regulations.
This expansionist perspective has had a major impact (both positive and negative) on the life and work of the women we have been studying. Clearly, expansion to the West by Fred Harvey created the opportunity for women to gain employment in Harvey restaurants. It is only after the heyday of family vacations in Western National Parks came to an end that Fred Harvey’s dream of establishing many restaurants throughout the West also ended. Though part of Harvey’s dream has found rebirth in the expansion of many fast-food franchises throughout the world, his vision of families flocking to national parks has not been sustained. We witness the opposite effect of an expansionist perspective in the loss of jobs in New England Mills. The owners of these mills have closed these operations and moved their mills to other regions of the United States or other countries.
