Posted on 01/28/2002 11:13:05 AM PST by jodorowsky
So when a very prettily written, albeit cross, letter from a Grade 12 student arrived last week, I first admired and then checked for the thinking part. Surprise! There was none. There was parroting, though, of the above-mentioned cherished beliefs, the entire battalion of which are directly responsible for Canada's decline. She quoted Thucydides and Walt Disney, proving that that wicked monopolist Microsoft's product, Bookshelf, is doing its job, and then went on to present as right-thinking the cant of multiculturalism, identity politics, anti-consumerism, Naomi Klein rubbish philosophy, framed by the entire clutch of deeply second-rate ideas dreamed up by the drug addicts in my benighted generation. I actually, for the first time, feared for our future. We Canadians have obviously taught our children that pretty writing stands in for clear thinking.
She was cross because I suggested that we invade Iraq so I can have cheap gas for my SUV. Let's put aside for a moment the barren heath of no laughter whereon some people, I mention no names, reside. She was cross because I said pollution from automobiles had been sharply reduced over the past 20 years. OK, so that's true, but what she wants is no pollution, immediately, and when she gets a car she will be sad because she will be adding to the pollution. And China, by the way, better not start wanting BMWs. But what really exercised her righteous anger was the suggestion that the children of Iraq should be taught the joys of McDonald's and Mickey Mouse in exchange for their oil. I quote: "So we're going to give these kids a future by slapping a Big Mac in their little hands and putting Mickey Mouse ears on their heads? Maybe we shouldn't be joking about this at all because affluence, or 'freedom' as Nickson calls it, leads to a hollow faith in the market that not only exploits ruthlessly, but might destroy us too."
OK, so my faith is so completely not hollow. And I admit I should have come right out and said it. Capitalism is the only thing that will save the Middle East from erupting in nuclear fire, probably in my lifetime, and as one of the world's most affluent countries, it is our responsibility to aggressively promote and export the practices and habits that ensure our own current peace, security and prosperity. And, in exchange, secure for ourselves a source of power that will feed our prosperity and enable us to switch, when it is necessary and possible, to fuel cells and clean energy. We are 50 years away from the sustainability my young critic and every other enviro nutbar rich woman with time on her hands desires, but to get there we must be rich enough, as individuals and as a country, to create the world she wants. Why is this so difficult to understand? Why? Why? Anybody?
Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, the Palestinian Authority and, let's face it, most of the continent of Africa, all lack to some degree or other, the institutions of democratic capitalism. These institutions, by the way, are not tribunals of political correctness wrenching apologies out of anyone born with a roof over their head, but are things we take so much for granted they are invisible. Nevertheless, generations of dead white men gave their lives creating them. Like? Like generally accepted accounting practices, double-entry bookkeeping, title and the individual right to private property (being eroded on my island, but never mind), the rule of law, legal corporations, limited liability, the inability of government to confiscate or tax individual property except by due process (also being eroded), the clear legal process of marriage and inheritance, plus the immense range of devices from commercial and personal insurance to stock exchanges that promote, protect, maximize and employ savings efficiently, in fact, all the devices of wealth production which underpin the freedom that we enjoy today. Freedom, I might add, that the crowd currently in power in Ottawa seems determined to destroy. Eroded freedoms that have led us to the degraded state we, as a country, are now in, measured by the shameful value of our dollar.
Being 21 means that history cannot move fast enough. Maturity means you admit some things are going to happen slowly, that they will happen in an unpredictable fashion, and some of them will happen after you are dead. The market is not controlled by anyone, it is the medium through which millions of free people express their desires -- not the desires others would have them have, but their actual desires -- and find a way to pay for them. The spectacle of Enron going down in flames only proves just how healthy and good capitalism is. The walking slime that stole the retirement of thousands of workers will be hounded till the end of their days, and the next few months will be the ruin of their families. The scandal will not be covered up, it will not be excused or explained away. Their crime will be examined, in detail, on television, wall to wall for weeks, and all of us will learn from it. Capitalism is self-critical and self-correcting, as Paul Johnson said recently. It is a force of nature because it reflects, perfectly, human nature and the desire of every human everywhere to grow.
Being on the outside, without any of the mechanisms in place that would allow you to participate, is the real prison. No amount of pretty writing from confused, brainwashed Canadians will make that fact go away.
Seems to me, they got it bass-ackwards.
Article I, Section 8.
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises...To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;...
Our great nation was founded on principles of individual freedom, liberty and opportunity, NOT corporate freedom, liberty and opportunity. The excesses of unbridled, laissezz-faire Capitalism can be just as oppressive of individual freedom and opportunity as authoritarian Communism.
Which excesses did you have in mind?
There are many, ranging from overt human abuse to monopolistic control of markets to corrupt influence of government policies. (I'm unaware of any corporation that functions similar to a representative democracy.)
The point is: capitalism springs forth from individual freedom, not vice-versa.
Those fanatics who worship at capitalism's altar seem to forget this (or intentionally deny it) in their rush to establish a global corporate feudal state to lord over us irrelevant, individual serfs.
The author seems to cede the liberal notion that material prosperity is required for freedom. This idea is the basis for all the economic redistribution and social programs government imposes.
Captialism proceeds from freedom and respect for freedom and individual rights is a check on capitalism.
The monopolies that were broken up in the early 20th century were not natural monopolies. They existed because the government had given them something -- land, mineral rights, exclusive license to put up utility poles. In short the government created them, usually by taking something from one group and giviving it to another.
Nonsense.
But suppose I say that a corporation can't be allowed to have more thatn a certain percentage market share? On what basis? And who is going to be forced to go against their personal wishes to buy products to prop up another company's market share?
All this is irrelevant if a corporation engages in fraud, or violates contracts. These sins are covered by laws that have nothing to do with monopoly.
But suppose a corporation says, "We are going to offer discounts on our products to those who help promote our other products." Exactly why is this illegal?
For example?
I live in one - a housing co-op.
It's not so much a matter of forcing buyers to buy alternative products as it is addressing the factors that enable the monopoly in order to facilitate a more competitive market. In some instances, this may entail breaking-up the monopolistic corporations. (Interestingly, divestiture is also a valid strategy for maximizing return to stockholders.) Alternatively, patents, copyrights, etc. may also be declared void in order to restore competition to the market.
In instances where "natural" monopolies exist, the concept of "public utility" is legitimate. We are currently in an era where this concept is actively being challenged in electric power generation and distribution. IMHO, considering the Kalifornia Energy crisis and the Enron debaucle, the jury is still out on this. So far, the deregulation bug hasn't really hit other natural monopolies such as water supply and sewage treatment systems.
I've engaged privatization fanatics on this forum who declare that all highway/road ownership/construction/maintenance should be turned over to the private sector. It would be humorous to see them unable to leave their own driveways without passing through the neighborhood toll booth!
These are examples of raw, naked theft by government at gunpoint. They are examples of facism, government ownership of production in a nominally capitalist system.
Answered in reply #6.
I live in one - a housing co-op.
Not exactly a classic example of an organization seeking to maximize profit in a competitive market.
Actually more akin to VERY local, neighborhood government imposing zoning laws as to what color trash cans you can set out on the curb.
(((Big Sigh!!!)))
First of all, please do some research and learn the proper definition of "fascism". Government ownership of production is communism or socialism, NOT fascism.
Secondly, the examples I cited (which you quoted) are not examples of government "ownership" or even "theft". They are examples of government regulation of artificial entities whose very creation and existence is subject to government approval (the act of incorporation.)
And what the heck is "invalidating patents" for the good of society if it isn't theft. Unless you graduated from the london School of Economics?
The excesses of unbridled, laissezz-faire Capitalism can be just as oppressive of individual freedom and opportunity as authoritarian Communism.
Still trying to “bridle” the market, eh Willie.
You don’t have to buy from any corporation. You don’t have to work for any corporation. No corporation can imprison you.
Yet you want to give more power to the government (who can do all those things) in the name of “individual freedom.”
Nonsensical.
You must admit the first is a little vague! What do you mean by "overt human abuse"?
On the second, can you give an example of a monopoly that has not been a government franchise?
On the third, this is an argument for separation of economy and state. Corruption is a fact of life. It seems to me that if you have government power available to be bought then someone will buy it, especially if it has to do with controlling other peoples' business activities. Won't this corruption be minimised if the role of the state is also minimised?
(I'm unaware of any corporation that functions similar to a representative democracy.)
"In a free society no one will stop you..." from starting such a corporation.
The point is: capitalism springs forth from individual freedom, not vice-versa.
Mu. As I see it they're two ways of looking at the same thing from different angles so I don't disagree. Capitalism enables individual freedom and flourishing... and because humans are free by nature, a "capitalist" system (to use the marxist word for "free market") is the least bad way to decide who gets to use what for which purposes.
Those fanatics who worship at capitalism's altar seem to forget this (or intentionally deny it) in their rush to establish a global corporate feudal state to lord over us irrelevant, individual serfs.
Well, you can never expect much from worshipping fanatics. But who did you have in mind? Adam Smith? Milton Friedman?
Anyways, it isn't corporations that take away more than half of our incomes to set up corrupt, counterproductive medical, educational, judicial, pension, etc. plans. That's the government. Corporations can't make the same "offers you can't refuse".
Laizzez-faire is the concept that sets us free. But you won't hear much about this (around here) as the GOP has taken offense to the basic nature human dignity as well.
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.