ECONOMIES OF EXTRACTION

(PRESENTED TO EDEN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE MASTER OF THEOLOGICAL STUDIES)

Introduction

Economic systems of extraction have infiltrated societies for thousands of years. Nevertheless, their presence is most often overlooked. These economic systems, typically accompanied by political systems of totalism, facilitate the transfer of wealth from ordinary individuals, especially the poor and vulnerable, to those already possessing substantial resources. This transfer of wealth often goes unnoticed, initially, due to being obscured by technical language, as well as the assertion that this is the natural order of economic life, while in reality, these economic systems are structured to channel wealth upward under the guise of fairness and claims that “this is just how the economy works.”

The dilemma stems from a major core issue that is pretty straightforward: workers are routinely denied the full value of their labor. Demands for frequent, continuous increases in productivity are built into the system in ways that benefit executives and shareholders, whereas wages for most workers stagnate and fail to keep pace with the cost of living. The resulting gap between common working people and the wealthy and affluent elite continues to widen. This dynamic is perpetuated by financial systems and institutions that exact high fees that overburden struggling families, tax systems that favor investment income over wages, resources once public that are privatized for profit, and companies that prioritize shareholder returns over fair pay and community well-being.

This paper argues that economies of extraction, which treat human beings as resources to be exploited, are unjust and unethical. This essay will look at historical and contemporary examples of economic extraction. It will then examine ethical, philosophical, and theological principles in relation to economies of extraction. Finally, it will conclude with a summary and a call to action.

Historical and Contemporary Examples of Economies of Extraction

While extractive economic systems have taken many forms throughout history, their many beneficiaries having developed and utilized numerous political, financial, and tax structures to prop them up, all such systems of extraction serve the same basic purpose: to funnel and transfer wealth from the many to benefit the few. Perhaps the best-known such system is that enacted upon the Hebrews by Egypt’s Pharaoh in Exodus.

During a time of drought and famine in the region, the Hebrew people sought assistance from Pharaoh (Gen 42). Because the governor of Egypt happened to be a relative, the Hebrews were permitted to move to Egypt during the crisis; yet, because they were shepherds and cattle farmers, they were required to dwell outside urban areas and were also tasked with caring for Pharaoh’s herds. Thus, they essentially became Egyptians by migration, though not with full citizenship. Nevertheless, the governor of the land assured them that he would make sure they were fed throughout the famine. When they became unable to purchase food from him with money, the governor required their livestock. Afterward, they relinquished their land and even willingly became slaves of Pharaoh simply to obtain food, thereby becoming indentured slaves. The governor provided them with food and seed to sow in the land, but required twenty percent of the harvest. The people had to use what remained to feed themselves and their livestock and to use for seed (Gen 47). Soon, the Hebrews were subjected to increasingly terrible and grueling bondage and servitude by taskmasters set over them (Ex 1:7-14, 2:23). The Hebrews were under constant surveillance and continuously ordered to be more and more productive, even with fewer and fewer resources (Ex 5:5-19), with Pharaoh extracting all possible labor and worth from the people he possibly could.

In somewhat more recent history, one of the clearest examples of economies of extraction is plantation slavery in the Americas. Through their labor, enslaved people produced enormous wealth for the owner classes. Of course, the slaves themselves received nothing more than having their bare survival needs met. “In 1860, the economic value of slaves in the United States exceeded the invested value of all of the nation’s railroads, factories, and banks combined,”[1] showing the enormous amount of wealth that was being extracted from their labor.

Another historical example is the enclosure movement in England, which took place between the 12th and 19th centuries and involved thousands of parliamentary acts, leading to modern ideas of private land ownership. For hundreds of years, commoners and peasants had access to spaces known as “commons”—shared communal lands where they could gather firewood, graze animals, and practice subsistence farming. However, gradually, wealthy aristocrats began fencing off these spaces and claiming them as private property. Peasants and subsistence farmers were forced to either work for wages on the very same lands they had previously used freely, or to move into more urban areas and labor in sweatshop factories—either way, generating profits chiefly for the wealthy. The poet John Clare wrote profoundly regarding this tragedy.[2]

Company towns also operated on similar principles. Although workers received wages, they had to spend them at company stores with heavily inflated prices. This created cycles of debt that then kept them dependent on the company. The song “Sixteen Tons,” popularized by singer Tennessee Ernie Ford, illustrates this concept: “I owe my soul to the company store.”[3]

Today, economic extraction often operates in less obvious ways, though still achieving the same results. Financial institutions and the credit system extract wealth from the middle class and poor, those with the least money and means, who can barely get by, and funnel it to the top-tier elite: banks imposing high fees and overdraft charges; mortgages, auto loans, and credit cards exacting higher interest rates and fees on those with the least capital and means; and payday loans with interest rates as high as 400%. Through inflated costs that flow to executives and shareholders, the healthcare system in the U.S. extracts exorbitant amounts of wealth, resulting in medical debt being the leading cause of bankruptcy. Similarly, through corporate landlords who aggressively raise rents (often while also providing very minimal upkeep), the housing market siphons wealth from lower-income renters who often end up paying well over 50% of their income for rent.

The modern “gig economy” represents a newer form of economic extraction. Here, companies classify workers as contractors rather than employees in order to avoid providing them with benefits. This loophole allows companies to avoid providing benefits while also allowing them to shift costs, such as vehicle maintenance, onto workers. And now, even our attention has become a resource to be exploited. The Attention Merchants, a book by Tim Wu—distinguished professor at Columbia University—was “released roughly 10 years ago, sounding the alarm on how attention was turning into a commodity in the internet age and was increasingly exploited.”[4] According to Wu, “the resource of human attention is becoming scarcer and more valuable and ‘companies are very sophisticated at essentially harvesting this resource from us at a very low price.’”[5] Meanwhile, the current tax system facilitates economic extraction through levying lower rates on investment income (predominantly earned by the wealthy) as compared to that levied on wages, the primary income source for most Americans.

These examples are all connected through their common function: the transfer of wealth from those who produce it to those who already control significant resources. Rather than being blatantly obvious in extracting value, labor, and wealth from human beings, these latter examples present themselves as natural or inevitable aspects of how economies should operate. Yet, by examining their true function rather than their stated purpose, one can identify the common pattern of extraction that violates ethical, theological, and biblical principles of economic justice.

Ethical, Philosophical, and Theological Principles Against Economies of Extraction

Many ethical traditions offer powerful critiques of systems that commodify people and funnel wealth upward. However, they do not always speak with one voice. Karen Lebacqz states that her approach shares similarities with John Rawls’ theory, “which provides that justice is done when the least advantaged are benefited.”[6] Nevertheless, she points out that his approach to justice “appears to leave open the possibility that ‘justice’ consists in anything that leaves the poor or disadvantaged better off than they were before,” whereas she believes that “[j]ustice requires liberation, not simply improvements within an oppressive structure” and that her method “suggests that justice consists primarily in liberation from oppression and in ‘new beginnings’ that undo oppressive structures.”[7] Lebacqz also notes that, although Nozick’s theory of justice honors human freedom, particularly freedom of choice, his views are not necessarily compatible with her conception of economic liberation. She indicates that “[w]here Nozick would assume that the market system is generally free of the need for correction, [she] would assume precisely the opposite, based on the concrete realities of injustice.”[8] Lebacqz says that in her idea of liberative justice, a new beginning (termed ‘correction’ above) is always needed, and the theme of jubilee runs throughout her work.

In the history of the study of political economy (later renamed economics), some have held it to moral and ethical standards. Prior to the middle of the 18^th century, economics was seen as an aspect of the more broad study of theological, moral, and political affairs. Within the Aristotelian traditions, it was part of ethics and politics, and the Scholastics viewed it as a theological and moral concern. However, this slowly began to change with the rise of pamphleteers (later referred to by Adam Smith as mercantilists) between the 15^th and 18^th centuries. These businessmen were very influential in economic policy.

“[T]he goal of the mercantilists was to increase their own wealth, and the wealth of their country, through the extensive use of government intervention…‘Mercantilism involved…a marked break with the ethical attitudes and instructions of Aristotle and of Saint Thomas Aquinas and the Middle Ages in general’ (Galbraith, 1987, p. 37). In this quotation, Galbraith implicitly argues that the emergence of these writers marked the point where economics broke with the moral sciences.”[9]

Alvey notes that “a recent commentator on the role of positivism in economics commented this way: ‘Most economists today…would agree that the claim of an economic theory free from values is essential in establishing the scientific nature of the discipline. A positive, value-free economics, in the sense of not relying on any particular set of value judgements or on any philosophical or psychological framework, is generally seen as ideal. This approach has crucially influenced important branches of economics such as microeconomic theory’ (Drakopoulos, 1997, p. 286).”[10] This view is known as ‘positivism.’ Notice that in this view, economics is “value-free.” Due to this value-free view of economics, “Yezer et al. state that ‘introductory microeconomics is based on assumptions of rationally selfish behavior’ (1996, p. 178)… Hausman and McPherson comment: ‘Learning economics, it seems, may make people more selfish’ (1993, p. 674; see also Marwell and Ames, 1981, p. 309; Lux, 1990, pp. 198-9).”[11] Alvey concludes that mainstream economics has now devolved to the point at which moral concerns are regarded as irrelevant.

Max Stackhouse believes that the judgment of the corporation as “alienating and dehumanizing…for it is based, as it must be, on the making of a profit, the impersonality of the market, the mechanism of engineered needs, and finally the worship of mammon” is not what “the human experience that people in our churches have in corporations.”[12] Stackhouse asserts that the corporation is based on the economic structure and disciplines of the church. He sings the praises of corporations, declaring that they “have created more wealth than most of humankind can imagine, and they seem likely to do so in the foreseeable future. What was once rooted in oikos and transformed by oikoumene has become a corporate economy—now significantly independent not only of oikos and polis but of oikoumene as well.”[13] Stackhouse believes that the corporation is worth saving, despite its extractive tendencies. He admits, however, that “every organized center of economic activity thus far developed involves the domination of some over others…because the corporation can provide a kind of immortality, it can require human sacrifice on its altar.”[14]

Others, such as Rauschenbush, acknowledge that capitalism, the most common form of extractive economy at present, is fundamentally unethical. He indicates that “the distinctive characteristic of the capitalistic system is that the industrial outfit of society is owned and controlled by a limited group, while the mass of the industrial workers is without ownership or power over the system within which they work. A small group of great wealth and power is set over against a large group of propertyless [people].”[15] This allows the greed and cunning of the few elite to set the pace for everyone else, and allows their selfish impulses to be in control.

Important perspectives are also seen in the philosophical traditions. For instance, Kantian ethics denounces the way extractive economies treat human beings primarily as resources to be exploited. Kant’s Formula of Humanity says to “always treat yourself and others never merely as a means but always at the same time as ends in themselves [Zweck an sich selbst]… persons are ends in themselves in the sense that their existence gives us reasons to act in respectful ways toward them, and not ends in the sense of states of affairs we should aim to bring about through our actions.”[16]

Notable Old Testament scholar and theologian Walter Brueggemann staunchly stands against economies of extraction, declaring that “the Bible offers a sustained critique of the economy of extraction and consistently offers an alternative.”[17] Brueggemann points out how the Bible refutes what he refers to as “the myth of scarcity”—the false idea that there is not enough to go around, requiring that some people must naturally have to go without. This myth, says Brueggemann, helps to justify extraction by making inequality seem to be inevitable. Nevertheless, scripture proclaims a “liturgy of abundance”—the recognition that God has provided enough for everyone’s needs if resources are shared rather than hoarded. Brueggemann advocates for a system of neighborliness and circulation based upon biblical principles. However, as Alvey indicated above, the structure of the contemporary economy fosters greed. This greed doesn’t simply lie with those at the top—if there is an actual “trickle-down” effect, it is that this greed has trickled down from the very top all the way to the poorest among us. The U.S. economy has, according to Brueggemann, “turned the corner toward imperialism and its companion, consumerism.”[18] “Consumerism is not simply a marketing strategy. It has become a demonic spiritual force among us and the theological question facing us is whether the gospel has the power to help us withstand it.”[19] Brueggemann notes that it was Pharaoh who introduced the principle of scarcity into the world economy. Yet he counters the scarcity mentality by pointing to the realization of the children of Israel in the wilderness in Exodus 16: “And the one who had much did not have too much, and the one who had little did not have too little” (Ex 16:18). The economy of God, based on principles that Brueggemann calls “neighborliness,” stands in total and complete opposition to the economy of extraction and scarcity.

Catholic Social Teaching (CTS) offers another framework through what it refers to as God’s “preferential option for the poor”—the idea that in economic decisions, those with the least power and resources should be given priority. Recent papal teaching has extensively developed this principle, emphasizing that rather than treating human beings as mere commodities, economies should serve human flourishing. Recently, “Pope Leo XIV criticized how the wealthy live in a ‘bubble of comfort and luxury’ while poor people suffer on the margins, confirming in his first teaching document that he is in perfect lockstep with his predecessor Pope Francis on matters of social and economic justice.”[20]

Liberation theology, which was developed in response to extreme poverty alongside tremendous wealth in Latin America, helps one to understand economic extraction as deliberately designed rather than occurring naturally. This theological perspective argues that poverty is not accidental. Liberation theology has always had a “willingness to name the structural failures and processes that lead to economic inequality and poverty as manifestations of social sin…[B]y naming these as sin, liberation theologians remind us that inequality and poverty are always in some way the result of decisions, choices, and patterns of actions.”[21]

These diverse perspectives are connected through their recognition that economies should serve human flourishing rather than treating people as resources to be exploited. They understand that human beings have inherent dignity that transcends their economic utility and they all challenge systems that concentrate wealth in the hands of a very few while leaving others struggling to meet basic needs. These frameworks help explain why today’s economy of extraction—from predatory lending to the hoarding of housing and land by corporations to tax systems that favor the wealthy—violates the fundamental principles of justice. They also help to remind one that economies of extraction are not inevitable. They are human creations that can be corrected and redesigned to better serve the human community and reflect God’s intentions.

Conclusion

This paper has shown how economies of extraction—systems designed to extract resources from the many and funnel them to the few—are unjust. It has provided historical as well as contemporary examples of extractive economies and demonstrated that they are contrary to many principles of ethics, philosophy, and theology. However, understanding the problem is not enough. People need to recognize the fact that extractive systems are neither natural nor inevitable—they are human creations that can and must be changed. When someone in authority says, “That’s just how the economy works,” one should see this as an attempt to make exploitation seem normal. Alternative economic structures can be built within each community and nation. Credit unions, community land trusts, worker-owned businesses and corporations, and community gardens and subsistence farming all offer avenues for creating small-scale alternatives. Advocates are needed to advance policies that reduce extraction and promote neighborly circulation. This means supporting tax policies that prevent excessive wealth concentration, labor laws that ensure fair compensation, and consumer protections that prevent predatory financial practices. One should examine one’s own participation within extractive systems and make changes when and where possible—making intentional choices about where to bank, how to invest, what to buy, and where to work. The biblical vision of economic relationships based on neighborliness and circulation rather than on greed and extraction is not just an ancient ideal—it is a practical alternative to the unjust and unethical systems that dominate the world today. By combining understanding with action, work can be made toward an economy that is more just, more ethical, and that better reflects God’s intention for the human community, where resources circulate among neighbors to meet everyone’s needs rather than flowing upward to enrich the elite few.

[1] Benjamin T. Arrington, “Industry and Economy During the Civil War,” National Park Service of the United States, accessed November 20, 2025, https://www.nps.gov/articles/industry-and-economy-during-the-civil-war.htm.

[2] See R.S. Attack, John Clare: Voice of Freedom (Shepheard-Walwyn, 2010).

[3] Tennessee Ernie Ford, vocalist. “Sixteen Tons,” by Merle Travis, recorded September 1955, on the B-side of “You Don’t Have to Be a Baby to Cry,” Capitol 45 rpm.

[4] Nick Lichtenberg, “Why the Economy Has That ‘Weird Feeling of Something You Like Getting Worse’: One of America’s Top Legal Theorists on ‘The Age Of Extraction,’” Fortune.com, November 30, 2025, https://fortune.com/2025/11/30/tim-wu-interview-economic-resentment-angry-politics-weird-feeling-age-of-extraction/.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Karen Lebacqz, “Implications for a Theory of Justice,” in From Christ to the World: Introductory Readings in Christian Ethics, ed. by Wayne G. Boulton et al. (William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1994), 258.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Ibid.

[9] James E. Alvey, “An Introduction to Economics as a Moral Science,” International Journal of Social Economics 27, no. 12 (2000), PDF, 3, https://doi.org/10.1108/03068290010353208.

[10] Ibid., 2, emphasis mine.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Max Stackhouse, “Spirituality and the Corporation,” in From Christ to the World: Introductory Readings in Christian Ethics, ed. by Wayne G. Boulton et al. (William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1994), 309.

[13] Ibid., 306.

[14] Ibid., 310.

[15] Walter Rauschenbusch, “The Case of Christianity against Capitalism,” in From Christ to the World: Introductory Readings in Christian Ethics, ed. by Wayne G. Boulton et al. (William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1994), 455.

[16] Paul Formosa, “Dignity and Respect: How to Apply Kant’s Formula of Humanity,” Philosophical Forum 45, no. 1 (Spring 2014): 51-52, https://research-ebsco-com.library3.webster.edu/c/v6tgqo/viewer/pdf/

rmjnbg4k75.

[17] Walter Brueggemann, “Hardin-Simmons University Logsdon Chapel Address,” January 10, 2017, posted on September 17, 2017 by Hardin-Simmons University, Youtube, 31 min. 30, sec.,

[18] Walter Brueggemann, “From Biblical Narrative to Economic Policy,” National Catholic Reporter, August 21, 2009, https://research-ebsco-com.library3.webster.edu/c/v6tgqo/viewer/pdf/wuncm7wdvf.

[19] Walter Brueggemann, “The Liturgy of Abundance, the Myth of Scarcity.” The Christian Century 116, no. 10 (Mar 24 - 31 1999): 342, https://research-ebsco-com.library3.webster.edu/c/v6tgqo/viewer/pdf/awzcsb3hzr.

[20] Nicole Winfield, “Pope Leo Condemns Economies That Marginalize the Poor While the Wealthy Live in a Bubble of Luxury,” PBS News, October 9, 2025, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/pope-leo-condemns-economies-that-marginalize-the-poor-while-the-wealthy-live-in-a-bubble-of-luxury.

[21] Benjamin Valentin, “What’s ‘Liberation’ Got to Do with It?” Reflections, Yale Divinity School, Spring 2017, https://reflections.yale.edu/article/god-and-money-turning-tables/what-s-liberation-got-do-it.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alvey, J. E. “An Introduction to Economics as a Moral Science.” International Journal of Social Economics, 27, no. 12 (2000). PDF. https://doi.org/10.1108/03068290010353208.

Arrington, Benjamin T. “Industry and Economy during the Civil War.” National Park Service of the United States. https://www.nps.gov/articles/industry-and-economy-during-the-civil-war.htm.

Attack, R.S. John Clare: Voice of Freedom. Shepheard-Walwyn, 2010.

Brueggemann, Walter. “From Biblical Narrative to Economic Policy.” National Catholic Reporter. August 21, 2009. https://research-ebsco-com.library3.webster.edu/c/v6tgqo/viewer/pdf/wuncm7wdvf.

—. “Hardin-Simmons University Logsdon Chapel Address.” January 10, 2017. Posted on September 17, 2017 by Hardin-Simmons University. Youtube. 31 min. 30, sec.

—. “The Liturgy of Abundance, the Myth of Scarcity.” The Christian Century 116, no. 10 (Mar 24 - 31 1999): 342-347. https://research-ebsco-com.library3.webster.edu/c/v6tgqo/viewer/pdf/2jz6dqoifz.

Formosa, Paul. “Dignity and Respect: How to Apply Kant’s Formula of Humanity.” Philosophical Forum 45, no. 1 (Spring 2014): 49-68. https://research-ebsco-com.library3.webster.edu/c/v6tgqo/viewer/pdf/rmjnbg4k75.

Ford, Tennessee Ernie, vocalist. “Sixteen Tons.” Written by Merle Travis. B-side of “You Don’t Have to Be a Baby to Cry.” Recorded September 1955. Capitol 45 rpm.

Lebacqz, Karen. “Implications for a Theory of Justice.” In From Christ to the World: Introductory Readings in Christian Ethics. Edited by Wayne G. Boulton, Thomas D. Kennedy, and Allen Verhey. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1994.

Lichtenberg, Nick. “Why the Economy Has That ‘Weird Feeling of Something You Like Getting Worse’: One of America’s Top Legal Theorists on ‘The Age of Extraction.’” Fortune.com. November 30, 2025. https://fortune.com/2025/11/30/tim-wu-interview-economic-resentment-angry-politics-weird-feeling-age-of-extraction/.

Rauschenbusch, Walter. “The Case of Christianity against Capitalism.” In From Christ to the World: Introductory Readings in Christian Ethics. Edited by Wayne G. Boulton, Thomas D. Kennedy, and Allen Verhey. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1994.

Stackhouse, Max. “Spirituality and the Corporation.” In From Christ to the World: Introductory Readings in Christian Ethics. Edited by Wayne G. Boulton, Thomas D. Kennedy, and Allen Verhey. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1994.

Valentin, Benjamin. “What’s ‘Liberation’ Got to Do with It?” Reflections. Yale Divinity School. Spring 2017. https://reflections.yale.edu/article/god-and-money-turning-tables/what-s-liberation-got-do-it.

Winfield, Nicole. “Pope Leo Condemns Economies That Marginalize the Poor While the Wealthy Live in a Bubble of Luxury,” PBS News. October 9, 2025. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/pope-leo-condemns-economies-that-marginalize-the-poor-while-the-wealthy-live-in-a-bubble-of-luxury.