The Human Cost of Perpetual Competition: Capitalism as a Human Rights Issue

Author: Olivia Weninger

June 4, 2026

[Image credit: Alamy]

From the founding of our nation, capitalism has been held as an esteemed and innate value, often mentioned with equal importance to other ideals such as democracy and liberty. However, it is impossible for a structure to be truly democratic if it is also capitalistic. Capitalism reaps true benefits for only a small percentage of people while, by design, demanding continuous growth, efficiency, and market dominance to survive. This creates a cycle of perpetual competition in which corporations, governments, and individuals are locked into an escalating race with no defined finish line. This article seeks to interrogate that cycle as a structural human rights concern, rather than a series of isolated policy failures. By examining how the structural imperatives of a profit-driven economy generate relentless competitive pressures, we find that these pressures systematically undermine access to human rights across three critical domains: worker welfare, environmental sustainability, and political and regulatory integrity.

Manufacturing anything requires the physical resources that make up the object, the labor of the individual who builds the object, and the preexisting capital of the person who can afford to purchase and utilize the prior two. This capital is where the term “capitalism” comes from. The aim of the person with the capital, whom, for the sake of argument, we call John, is to generate a profit. John can generate a larger profit if he lowers the wages of the workers. Here, profit is inversely related to worker wages, as the higher the worker wages, the lower the profit margin. John needs that extra profit as capital to be able to continue growing his company. If he is not willing to lower his wages, his competitor, Jane, might be. That means Jane will gain more capital and can buy better machinery, hire more workers, and have an overall larger market share. 

As Jane is more willing to lower the wages of her workers, she might be just as willing to care less about precarious work conditions or labor protections themselves if it meant that Jane garnered more profit. This relentless competition creates the suppression of wages and normalization of precarious work. The negative effects of this demand for a competitive advantage, though driven by and intended to benefit those with capital, are borne entirely by workers, both domestically and globally. Three articles from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are directly violated by this competition: the right to just and favorable working conditions (Article 23), the right to rest and leisure (Article 24), and the right to an adequate standard of living (Article 25). John may feel that he has no other choice but to join Jane in lowering wages in order to survive the capitalist cycle. 

Additionally, just as the person and their manual labor is a part of manufacturing something, so is the physical material itself. Take lithium, for example. Lithium is an element that is not regularly found in the United States , yet the demand for lithium has been skyrocketing due to the rapid growth of consumer goods such as electric vehicles, electronics including smartphones and laptops, and large grid energy storage (LithiumHarvest, 2026). Lithium largely comes from Chile, Argentina, and Bolivia–South America’s “Lithium Triangle" (Orquera, 2026). The processing of lithium is extremely water intensive, consuming roughly 500,000 gallons of water to produce one single ton of lithium (Sharma, 2025). Because much of this mining occurs in the Atacama Desert, this lithium mining consumes up to 65% of the region’s water supplies. This endangers local ecosystems as well as affects local farming and livestock. Local indigenous communities are protesting the expansion of the lithium industry, stating that it violates their rights and destroys their ancestral land (Daley, 2026). The cries of the locals and the strain on the environment does not matter to John and Jane; both are trying to get their hands on as much lithium as possible. If Jane obtains more lithium than John, there is a significant possibility that John could get pushed out of business. There are hardly any regulations in the U.S. that would keep John and Jane from acquiring more resources at the expense of others, let alone regulations preventing U.S. corporations from exploiting South American resources. As the income from the lithium trade bolsters the economy of these South American countries, this trade is hardly likely to stop, as both John and Jane compete with each other to buy more. 

Another example of an injustice imposed upon working-class communities is the rise of major AI data centers, notably those in southern states or arid environments. As the AI bubble has consistently inflated in the U.S., the pressure to create larger and more powerful data centers has dramatically increased. These data centers can consume up to 5 million gallons of water per day, equivalent to the water use of a town of around 10,000-50,000 people (Yanez-Barnuevo, 2025). John does not care because he does not live in the nearby towns; his water supply at home is great. John does care, however, about having a larger data center than Jane’s. A larger data center may entice stockholders to invest more money, allow for their AI to formulate quicker and more accurate answers than those of competitors, and increase their overall appeal in the market. Profit-driven competition incentivizes ecological exploitation, and both the environment and working-class communities receive the negative, disproportionate impact. 

Lastly, a worker under capitalism may often ask themselves how this blatant injustice has yet to be stopped or hindered in some way. America has such a strong democracy, how can these things be happening against the will of the general public? If each person receives one vote, then we, as the workers, should be able to decide what happens with our labor and with our shared common space–the world we live in. This is a strong indicator that capitalism and true democracy cannot coexist. Lobbying is the primary method by which companies are able to influence policies in order to limit the amount of regulations that stand in their path to unlimited growth. Lobbyists are paid by an organization or company to promote the positions of the organization to federal and state legislatures (Harvard Law School, 2022). John and Jane both heavily utilize lobbying in order to reduce restrictions that hinder their profit margin. Both of our capitalists are heavily invested in the U.S. oil industry, and pay sizable amounts of money to lobbyists to protect their interests. They pay their lobbyists to create a social media campaign in an attempt to change public opinion. They say that the oil industry creates jobs, is good for national security as we would not have to rely on foreign energy resources, and that continued oil drilling and further deregulation would make prices more affordable for the average American. Research into any of these claims would prove that each can be easily debunked. John and Jane do not care if the claims are true, they care if they cause the average American to actively vote for the further deregulation of fossil fuel mining. 

Additionally, John has a lobbyist friend who used to work in the government. John’s friend utilizes those connections in order to push for John’s interests. Furthermore, John is more than willing to heavily fund the political campaigns of politicians who are willing to help relax emission standards and drilling restrictions. Not all politicians are funded in this manner, but the fact that some are can restrict the progress of other politicians to create policy strong enough and fast enough to counteract these negative influences. The political system is slow, and by the time it catches up to many of these major companies, they have already garnered an immense amount of wealth and depleted as much as they could from the land and their workers.  

[Image credit: Shutterstock]

Overall, this means that economic competition distorts our democratic governance and compromises the state’s obligation to safeguard human rights by eroding protective legislation in the interests of those who have the money to do so. Instead of having a government that creates policy that works for its people, the people are forced to exist under the policies created by a government under the thumb of John and Jane. 

While capitalism is often critiqued in economic or political terms, it is rarely examined holistically as a human rights framework. Capitalism, at its core, requires the exponential increase of competitive pressure between corporations in order to ensure their survival. The losers are not the capitalists with the least amount of capital and market value; the losers are undoubtedly the workers who have little to no say in what happens next. Then what do we, as the workers, do? Firstly, read up. Being aware is step one in making a change. Know who owns what, and even if it seems philanthropic, always ask yourself who the funders are. Be conscious about where you shop, and understand that your purchasing power as a consumer is important. Advocate for politicians who do not take large corporate money. Be aware of the media you consume. Many major media outlets are currently owned by only a handful of wealthy CEOs who decide what news gets put in front of you. Make sure to consume unbiased, unbought media. One way that readers can do this is through media comparison tools like GroundNews, which shows stories from both the left and the right, and lets the audience know where the bias may lie. Lastly, be an activist in small or big ways. Simply talking with your inner circle can help ease anxieties and make people feel less alone. Simply put, we were not meant to sacrifice our humanity for the sake of endless competition. 

---

Glossary

• Atacama Desert: A dry region in Chile heavily affected by lithium extraction, where water use for mining competes with local ecosystems and communities.

• Capital: Wealth or assets (money, machinery, property, resources) used to generate more wealth through investment or production.

• Capitalism: An economic system where private individuals or companies own resources and means of production, and goods/services are produced for profit in competitive markets.

• Democracy (as used in this argument): A system where citizens have political power through voting and representation. This article critiques how economic power may distort this ideal.

• Economic Inequality: The unequal distribution of wealth and resources among individuals or groups in society.

• Environmental Sustainability: The ability to maintain ecological balance by using resources in ways that do not permanently damage ecosystems or future availability.

• Labor / Workers: People who provide the human effort needed to produce goods or services, often in exchange for wages.

• Legislative Influence: The ability of individuals or organizations (often corporations) to shape laws and regulations.

• Lithium Mining: The extraction of lithium, often water-intensive and environmentally disruptive, especially in arid regions like the Atacama Desert.

• Lithium Triangle: A region in South America (Chile, Argentina, and Bolivia) that contains large global reserves of lithium, a key material for batteries.

• Lobbying: The practice of influencing government policy by individuals or organizations, often through funding, advocacy, or direct communication with lawmakers.

• Market Share: The portion of a market controlled by a particular company or product. Increasing market share often drives competitive behavior in capitalism.

• Perpetual Competition: A continuous, never-ending state of economic rivalry between companies, where each must constantly grow, cut costs, or innovate to avoid losing market position.

• Precarious Work: Employment that is insecure, unstable, or lacking protections such as benefits, job security, or safe working conditions.

• Profit Margin: The difference between revenue and costs in a business. Higher profit margins usually mean more money retained by the company after expenses like wages and production.

• Regulatory Protection / Regulation: Rules created by governments to control business practices, often intended to protect workers, consumers, or the environment.

• Structural Issue: A problem built into the design of a system itself, rather than arising from isolated events or individual choices.

• Worker Welfare: The physical, economic, and social well-being of workers, including wages, safety, rights, and working conditions.

---

References

1. Daley, Elizabeth. “The Lithium Triangle - Land Rights and Loss in Chile’s Atacama Desert.” Devpolicy Blog from the Development Policy Centre, 3 Apr. 2026, devpolicy.org/the-lithium-triangle-land-rights-and-loss-in-chiles-atacama-desert-20260404/

2. “Lobbying.” Harvard Law School, 8 Aug. 2022, hls.harvard.edu/bernard-koteen-office-of-public-interest-advising/about-opia/what-is-public-interest-law/public-interest-work-types/lobbying/

3. “The Lithium Mining Market - Lithium Harvest.” Lithiumharvest.Com, 28 Apr. 2026, lithiumharvest.com/knowledge/lithium/the-lithium-mining-market/.

4. Orquera, Estefania, et al. Lithium in Latin America: A Dynamic Material Flow Analysis and Mapping CO2, Water, and Land Footprints to 2050 - Sciencedirect, Feb. 2026, www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344925005543 

5. Sharma, Nidhi. “Water Shortage Threatens the World’s Most Abundant Lithium Reserves.” NBCNews.Com, NBCUniversal News Group, 31 Mar. 2025, www.nbcnews.com/science/climate-change/water-shortage-threatens-worlds-abundant-lithium-reserves-rcna198945

6. “Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” United Nations, United Nations, www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights

7. Yanez-Barnuevo, Miguel. “Data Centers and Water Consumption.” EESI, 25 Jun. 2025, www.eesi.org/articles/view/data-centers-and-water-consumption