Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Spoiled Children of Capitalism
National Review Online ^ | August 01, 2008 | Jonah Goldberg

Posted on 08/01/2008 7:47:41 AM PDT by Toddsterpatriot

It’s an old story. Loving parents provide a generous environment for their offspring. Kids are given not only ample food, clothing and shelter, but the emotional necessities as well: encouragement, discipline, self-reliance, the ability to work with others and on their own. And yet, in due course, the kids rebel. Some even say their parents never loved them, that they were unfair, indifferent, cruel. Often, such protests are sparked by parents’ refusal to be even more generous. I want a car, demands the child. Work for it, insist the parents. Why do you hate me? asks the ingrate.

Of course, being an old story doesn’t make it a universal one. But the dynamic is universally understood.

We’ve all witnessed the tendency to take a boon for granted. Being accustomed to a provision naturally leads the human heart to consider that provision an entitlement. Hence the not-infrequent lawsuits from prison inmates cruelly denied their rights to cable TV or apple brown betty for desert.

And so it goes, I think, with capitalism generally.

Capitalism is the greatest system ever created for alleviating general human misery, and yet it breeds ingratitude.

People ask, “Why is there poverty in the world?” It’s a silly question. Poverty is the default human condition. It is the factory preset of this mortal coil. As individuals and as a species, we are born naked and penniless, bereft of skills or possessions. Likewise, in his civilizational infancy man was poor, in every sense. He lived in ignorance, filth, hunger, and pain, and he died very young, either by violence or disease.

The interesting question isn’t “Why is there poverty?” It’s “Why is there wealth?” Or: “Why is there prosperity here but not there?”

At the end of the day, the first answer is capitalism, rightly understood. That is to say: free markets, private property, the spirit of entrepreneurialism and the conviction that the fruits of your labors are your own.

For generations, many thought prosperity was material stuff: factories and forests, gold mines and gross tons of concrete poured. But we now know that these things are merely the fringe benefits of wealth. Stalin built his factories, Mao paved over the peasants. But all that truly prospered was misery and alienation.

A recent World Bank study found that a nation’s wealth resides in its “intangible capital” — its laws, institutions, skills, smarts and cultural assumptions. “Natural capital” (minerals, croplands, etc.) and “produced capital” (factories, roads, and so on) account for less than a quarter of the planet’s wealth. In America, intangible capital — the stuff in our heads, our hearts, and our books — accounts for 82 percent of our wealth.

Any number of countries in Africa are vastly richer in baubles and soil than Switzerland. But they are poor because they are impoverished in what they value.

In large measure our wealth isn’t the product of capitalism, it is capitalism.

And yet we hate it. Leaving religion out of it, no idea has given more to humanity. The average working-class person today is richer, in real terms, than the average prince or potentate of 300 years ago. His food is better, his life longer, his health better, his menu of entertainments vastly more diverse, his toilette infinitely more civilized. And yet we constantly hear how cruel capitalism is while this collectivism or that is more loving because, unlike capitalism, collectivism is about the group, not the individual.

These complaints grow loudest at times like this: when the loom of capitalism momentarily stutters in spinning its gold. Suddenly, the people ask: What have you done for me lately? Politicians croon about how we need to give in to Causes Larger than Ourselves and peck about like hungry chickens for a New Way to replace dying capitalism.

This is the patient leaping to embrace the disease and reject the cure. Recessions are fewer and weaker thanks in part to trade, yet whenever recessions appear on the horizon, politicians dive into their protectionist bunkers. Not surprising that this week we saw the demise of the Doha round of trade negotiations, and this campaign season we’ve heard the thunder of anti-trade rhetoric move ever closer.

This is the irony of capitalism. It is not zero-sum, but it feels like it is. Capitalism coordinates humanity toward peaceful, productive cooperation, but it feels alienating. Collectivism does the opposite, at least when dreamed up on paper. The communes and collectives imploded in inefficiency, drowned in blood. The kibbutz lives on only as a tourist attraction, a baseball fantasy camp for nostalgic socialists. Meanwhile, billions have ridden capitalism out of poverty.

And yet the children of capitalism still whine.

— Jonah Goldberg is the author of Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left from Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Editorial
KEYWORDS: goldberg
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-65 last
To: TruthConquers
Please explain how keeping the old law would have prevented Enron from lying about their earnings. Take your time.
61 posted on 08/03/2008 1:54:47 PM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Half the time it could seem funny, the other half's just too sad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

You have been posting a question that you wish to have explained. But I am not the poster who posted the information that you base you inferred question on. Yet, I have asked of you other questions. You have not answered.

How old are you? Five? LOL!!


62 posted on 08/03/2008 2:16:54 PM PDT by TruthConquers (Delendae sunt publici scholae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: TruthConquers
You have been posting a question that you wish to have explained.

Yes I have.

But I am not the poster who posted the information that you base you inferred question on.

You only posted the following.

You mean you don’t know about the law that Gramm was part of that ended the 1933 depression era law that was *supposed* to protect us peons? Or was that 1933 law just smoke and mirrors? How did getting rid of it in the 90’s help us today?

Sounds like you're very familiar with the law. You just won't explain how it would have stopped Enron.

How old are you? Five?

What's your I.Q., five? LOL!

63 posted on 08/03/2008 2:21:40 PM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Half the time it could seem funny, the other half's just too sad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

You know, you are just dead set against anyone waking up to the devaluation of the US dollar.

Go way. Your questions aren’t asked to find answers. You ask to lead posters to where you can blast them for something they have not said.

LOLOLOL!!! How low will the dollar go? to 52?


64 posted on 08/03/2008 2:52:08 PM PDT by TruthConquers (Delendae sunt publici scholae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: TruthConquers

Thanks for running away from your claim. That was easy!


65 posted on 08/03/2008 2:54:06 PM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Half the time it could seem funny, the other half's just too sad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-65 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson