The Man Who Quit Money: Of Parasites and Men

anti-capitalism.png

anti-capitalism.png (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Book Review by Marjorie Haun

The Man Who Quit Money

By Mark Sundeen

Published March, 2012

 

Mark Sundeen’s book, “The Man Who Quit Money,” has been called “a thought-provoking and respectful account of one man’s search for meaning in a world preoccupied with money and the things it buys.” (Deseret News 3/10/12). The A.V. Club website says, “This inspiring biography follows a Utah man who gave up Capitalism and commerce in favor of a roving lifestyle.” And the protagonist of the book, Daniel Suelo, has been called everything from a “caveman” to “a kind of contemporary prophet, a thought-provoking blogger who identifies with Jesus and Thoreau.”

I contend that Suelo is no less dependent on money than anyone else in the industrialized world, and that he is neither a caveman nor a prophet, but an ingenious fraud.

This dewy-eyed narrative begins with an account of how Suelo, a middle-aged guy from a middle-class family, simply gave away all of his money, and in 2000 began a life journey through which he “has not earned, received, or spent a single dollar.” Sundeen emphasizes the point that Suelo “did not pay taxes, or accept food stamps, welfare, or any other form of government handout.” The book, a paean to anti-Capitalist axioms, cleverly skirts the actuality that Suelo lives as a parasite, scavenging at the fringes of society, and benefiting from the money and achievement of others everywhere he goes.

Mark Sundeen’s portraiture elevates vagabond Suelo to an unearned status of spiritual eminence. A worshipful tone prevails throughout The Man Who Quit Money. Suelo is almost, but not quite “a monk.” Sundeen is convinced that “he is driven by spiritual beliefs and longings.” But the book manages to ply its post-religious, PC verbiage carefully by assuring readers that Suelo is not “associated with any church.” Sundeen would have you believe that Daniel Suelo is the quintessential unemployed, victimized by Capitalism, enlightened but not religious, dumpster-diving, good-hearted hobo, global spiritual advisor next door.

The façade of Suelo’s “moneylessness” becomes nothing less than comical when the reader learns that he haunts public libraries in the towns through which he drifts so he can blog and meet people via Facebook. (Does Sundeen or Suelo himself care that the taxed earnings of men and women who actually work for a living are paying for his blogging and Facebooking activities?) He enjoys the central air conditioning, padded chairs, desks, computers, Internet access, books, walls, public restrooms, toilet paper, and water fountains he finds and uses freely in these libraries. Everything upon which his activities depend has been invented, developed, and built by people working for corporations. Daniel Suelo has not quit money in the libraries where he blogs and networks. He is simply mooching off the comforts and technological innovations created and paid for by others.

The Man Who Quit Money intimates that Daniel Suelo is often troubled by mental and physical ailments. Depression and fatigue appear to be the most persistent of his problems. But Suelo is not the pure spirit that some gullible readers might like to believe. He glibly experiments with religion and spirituality in a muddy amalgam of orthodoxy and New Age weltanschauung. Nor is Suelo politically neutral. Although his metaphysical and economic philosophies intermingle, a few insights distill from the book that reveal Suelo’s “opposition to money” grows out of a painfully naive and fractured understanding of the Capitalist free-market system. Suelo scorns Capitalism as he compares money to addictive substances: “But I don’t see heroin or meth as evil or good, either, “ he opines. “Which is more addictive and debilitating, money or meth?”

Sundeen claims that “In Suelo’s mind, the problem is far more ancient than the Fed or the WTO or even the invention of currency. Our reliance on money is akin to Original Sin, or the hubris of Prometheus stealing fire from the gods.”

To the reader who is acquainted with basic economic premises, Sundeen’s attempt to form a coherent theoretical statement out of Suelo’s contortions in thought, and roustabout travails on the road, is at best laughable and at worst absurd. The simple truth that humans are traders is abandoned in the pages of this literary chimera. It seems that Suelo is unable to discern that money is simply the means by which modern people trade value for value in the marketplace. Money is the token of agency that represents the relative worth people place on the things they want, out of necessity or caprice. The strength and longevity of the free-market comes from the liberating capacity of a person to give something of value to another for something of equal value.

The failure of Suelo to grasp these economic rudiments is troubling. One may be tempted to attribute Suelo’s inability to reason out even the most obvious matters to his mental troubles. Another conclusion may be that at some point Suelo was indoctrinated in anti-Capitalist theories. The geographical pattern in Suelo’s background and present travels, from Boulder, Colorado, to the blue Northwestern states, may affirm the suspicion that Suelo is a hard-core Liberal ideologue.

In the book Suelo crows, “I know it is possible to live with zero money. Abundantly.” The truth is that Suelo has discovered how to eschew his own fiscal responsibility and sponge off the money, substance, and innocent generosity of others. Sundeen’s book, and the fact that it is so popular, is symptomatic of a larger delusion that grips large sectors of American culture. The asinine notion that a man can “quit money” is part of a larger political dictum that says Capitalism is evil and should be rejected as both the philosophy and the system of American commerce. These notions are false, and have failed whenever implemented on a large scale. But these fanciful notions, embodied in the title of the book, have traction, especially within the Leftist enclaves haunted by Suelo; Moab, UT, Marin County, CA, Seattle, WA, for starters. The fallacies which allow Daniel Suelo to be defined as a man who has no need for money, are the same fallacies that fuel Socialist policies in Leftist enclaves across the country, as well as Washington D.C.

The rational reader must conclude that everything Suelo touches, uses, or scavenges has been imagined, planned, built, and purchased by someone else. The hat on his head, regardless of the fact that he pulled it out of a dumpster, was designed, sewn, and decorated by others. The machine used to sew together the felt from which the hat was made was invented and operated by others. The parts of that machine, from the motor, to the pulleys, to the needles, to the presser foot, were each manufactured by corporations. The parts of the machine were made largely of metals that were pulled out of the earth in the form of ore. They were smelted, molded, and machined into precision elements of a single, sophisticated unit, created through the voluntary cooperation of Capitalists at every level of the economic construct, in the pursuit of profit.

Daniel Suelo never gave up money. He may live without an income, but is nonetheless a parasite sustained by the minds, muscles, and money of others. Mark Sundeen’s book is the work of an idealist who has bought in to the fantastical idea that a man surrounded and sustained by a complex social framework, even though he has voluntarily chosen not to pull his own weight, could actually live without money.

7 Responses to The Man Who Quit Money: Of Parasites and Men

  1. Calendula7 November 22, 2012 at 1:10 pm

    Well, it seems that you must have drilled very deep into the piles of things that money can make to research the materials Daniel uses in his daily life. Do you, then, terribly resent his using the "chairs, walls & public rest rooms" for which your personal stash of cash is responsible via your taxes and brow-sweat?

    If so, I might add that I can muster up a bit of resentment that you have plied your terms for my friend–parasite, fraud (though you did grant that he is an ingenious fraud), contorted, & comical "etc., on the very internet that I pay for each month, and you didn't even consider if may have been a thoughtless theft of my time-to -lose. I find some moments of education about "basic economic premesis" here, for which I do thank you, like, money is:

    simply the means by which modern people trade value for value in the marketplace.

    Really? Is it truly that simple?

    I can tell by the articulate nature of your writing that you have talent. Too bad you mooched my time repeating all the terminology that can be found in almost any narrative of Daniel's resourceful life, by those who cannot bear to think about how much inventiveness it must take to live a life that I can attest, as a friend to Daniel, has tremendous value.

    Reply
    • Alan_Levesque November 22, 2012 at 2:40 pm

      I think Marjorie was just taking a deep philosophical look at Daniel's life and contrasted his lifestyle against the "earn your own living" gold standard of conservatism. When the bar is raised that high an otherwise self sufficient person bumming a cigarette because the stores are closed will be found wanting. I can't speak for her but I doubt that Marjorie stays up nights worrying that Daniel is costing her a few cents by using public facilities. For me, the idea of wandering the country like Kwai Chang Caine does have a sort of romantic appeal. It might be healthier and less stressful than the rat race.

      Reply
  2. Damian Nash November 22, 2012 at 4:03 pm

    Written with dazzling flair, Marjorie, as usual! A review of Daniel's life, before the book came out, raised the same question of whether he was a mooch on society, like a parasite. Here is the link to it: http://matadornetwork.com/change/man-has-lived-9-… The discussion thread that emerged from that article has been one of the best threads on the topic so far, including two of my best insights. As a science teacher, I can tell you for certain that some parasites are benign, and others are actually helpful to the organism.

    Reply
  3. Damian Nash November 22, 2012 at 4:06 pm

    Daniel has a degree in Anthropology from CU, Boulder, which is where we met in the 1980′s, in a course on the Psychology of Religion. Daniel’s lifestyle over the last dozen years can be portrayed as anthopological research, living in a fringe subculture of a powerful and wealthy society. What he notices about the rest of us is both intriguing and compelling. But Daniel is also a great biblical scholar who reads Hebrew and other ancient languages, finding profound nuances in scriptural passages, then conveying deep truth in a way that awakens more conventional people like me. His current lifestyle is driven by a passionate, mystical philosophy that will never allow him to feel homeless on a planet that is entirely owned by God.

    Although Daniel tries never to barter, at one level he does participate in the same kind of barter system known for centuries to Franciscan or Buddhist monks. His presence in our house “adds value” to the quality of life experience that my wife and I enjoy. He brings peace with him wherever he goes. We adore him, and so do all of our animals, whom he often “babysits” when we travel. You could even say our many fruit trees adore Daniel. He has helped prune and cultivate them over the years, thoroughly enjoyed many afternoon naps in a hammock in their shade, and savored their bounty with a kind of deep, mystical gratitude that few of us humans ever really feel.

    If anyone could call Daniel a “mooch” it would be me and my wife, because our home (and refrigerator) are always and unconditionally open to him. Yet we have never felt mooched, or otherwise taken advantage of. Quite the opposite, we look forward to his arrivals, feel enriched during his stays, and are saddened by his departures. Daniel is not a weight on society, holding us all back, as the word “mooch” implies. Instead, he is more like an angel who asks for nothing, but lifts us up others with his peace, love and wisdom.

    Perhaps the “mooching” equation should be turned around. How many in the world, who enjoy great material wealth, truly have an endless supply of love, wisdom, inner peace and happiness that they share freely with others around them? In many respects Daniel can be thought of as a saintly leader, one who has made great personal sacrifices in order to develop broadband access to God. Now the rest of us get to “mooch” off of his free internet wi-fi connection to heaven whenever he is around.

    Reply
    • Alan_Levesque November 23, 2012 at 12:05 am

      Good thoughts. "broadband access to God" I like that.

      Reply
  4. reagangirl November 23, 2012 at 9:48 am

    Be careful not to make the mistake of assuming my article is critical of Daniel Suelo. It is critical of the philosophy that capitalism is optional in a free society. Every free exchange in a prosperous society is a form of Capitalism–one individual exchanging value for value according to his desires. In Daniel's case he is not living without money. He benefits from the efforts and capitalistic interactions of others. He may even be participating in a form of Capitalism if he has something that people value which he exchanges for the physical support–clothing, space, food, tables, computers, a ride in a car, a bicycle made by workers in a factory–that he receives from others. The problem with the philosophical premise of this book is that there is no economic model that can be sustained by the kind of lifestyle Daniel has chosen. People must create the things we need to live–and if they are to do so freely, of their own choice with volition of their individual moral agency–they must be paid for that which they create.

    Reply
    • A friend of Daniel November 25, 2012 at 3:19 pm

      Did you say ***ume! <giggle!>

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

Have a conservative business, group or cause? Why not advertise with the Daily Pamphlet? Spread the word about your organization to like-minded conservatives! We have a host of options sure to fit your budget and you will benefit from our ongoing promotional efforts!

What we offer:


Banner Ads


Featured Backlinks


YouTube Video Ads


 

Have questions? send us an email at:

advertising@thedailypamphlet.com