Capitalism on the Run
Today I saw that a friend who is part of my motorcycle group and who declares as a conservative Republican put a post on Facebook that was intended to denigrate socialism and stand up for capitalism. He quoted Winston Churchill as saying, “Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” I found it necessary to rebut that (too much expert witness work of late is to blame I suspect). I threw back several other notable quotes.
Herbert Hoover – “The only trouble with capitalism is capitalists, they’re too damn greedy.”
Noam Chomsky – “A basic principle of modern state capitalism is that costs and risks are socialized to the extent possible, while profit is privatized.”
Bill Gates – “We have to find a way to make the aspects of capitalism that serve wealthier people serve poorer people as well”
John Maynard Keynes – “Capitalism is the extraordinary belief that the nastiest of men, for the nastiest of reasons, will somehow work for the benefit of us all.”
And I ended with Gregor Strasser, an early and outspoken Nazi party member, “The important part of the present development is the anti-capitalist sentiment that is permeating our people.”
It seems more and more clear that our country is going to test the fundamental principles that govern our way of life. We have spent the last four years testing the principles of democracy and I do not believe I am overstating it to say that at this moment, autocracy and aristocracy are prevailing over democracy. I understand that most “regular” folk do not live their lives by ideology and don’t like being characterized or labeled. That requires far too much thinking for most. They prefer to live their lives as they see fit under guiding principles that they are able to choose and reject as they wish when they wish. It used to be fighting words to accuse someone of being against democracy. I’m not so sure most of the prevailing advocates of the currently dominant order would care much one way of the other if you accused them of anti-democratic policies. Indeed they often just shrug and say something like “you have to look at the big picture.” We are at the height of ends justifying the means thinking.
Much of the support for Donald Trump is about the “big picture” of self interest. I don’t pretend that this was invented in the era of Donald Trump, but it is the baser instinct of man and it has been given new wing by a leader that lives by its creed and is unabashed in showing more and more of it to his accepting and sometimes adoring public. The only way to rationalize the people who do not inhabit the wealthy class and yet still support this autocratic and aristocratic path is to imagine that they too are adherents of self-interest in their own minor-league way and aspire to the larger rewards that the likes of Trump represent to them. If he talks and acts as crassly as they do, then maybe they too can get what he has with all its gold gilding and will not be barred from achieving more economic reward in life. It is the social and political equivalent of a lottery ticket and about as much fun in its expectational boldness….and you get to wear MAGA hats too as a symbol of the social contract.
Socialism, on the other hand, feels a lot less fun. There is no lottery, there is no back-slapping, and there are no MAGA hats. For those who are fans of the show Evita, You know that Peronism involved lots of populist promises that made the Peronist brand of capitalism feel more like social reform (a close, but disingenuous form of socialism) wherein the masses were given tidbits and actual lottery funds were diverted to the Eva Peron version of the Argentine Make-A-Wish Foundation so that everybody had a shot a momentary greatness. The brand of socialism that is espoused now is rarely called socialism, since it has a bad Marxist-Leninist connotation associated with it. The new brand is not utopian socialism, but more of a social democracy. The tenets include universal health care and universal education (both early and higher). There are broader rules about representation on company governance boards. There are more “liberal” minimum wages and retirement benefits (though that is coming under increasing attack as the aging population starts to bite into growth and incomes of the younger population). We are talking less of a repeat of the Soviet or Chinese or Cuban form of socialism (more properly termed communism) and instead whatever you want to call what places like Canada and Scandinavia (and somewhat in France) offer their citizens. To be sure, not everyone who has lived under those regimes find even that brand of socialism praiseworthy, but it has led to higher “happiness” ratings overall and does not seem to have overly stifled motivation and innovation.
I default to thinking Herbert Hoover (hardly a role model for anyone) had it more right than anyone. Capitalism is a great system if you can keep the wealthiest of the lot from getting greedy and adding to their power and wealth at the expense of the rest of the population, what Charles Dickens might scoffingly call the “surplus population”. But the nature of the beast is that when fed by enabling regulation (or lack thereof) and by the dark side of man’s ego and drive for dominance over all (Uber Alles), this unchecked capitalism becomes inevitably dysfunctional and far more harm than good. That is the point we find ourselves at now with wealth distribution. I will not quote tiresome statistics because we all know the truth that the rich have gotten richer and the poor have gotten barely to sustainable living standards. Yes, things are better than 100 years ago, by a lot, but expectations brought about largely by global transparency through the internet and mass media have created a growing sense of dislocation, alienation from the capitalist system and now, a demographic bulge that will even further heighten the disparities. These have all contributed to the sort of unrest that historically dislodges the status quo, whatever its called.
It’s impossible to tell if we are far enough on that spectrum to upset the apple cart, but we might well be. Hong Kong seems to be, and its hard to imagine a place more deeply rooted in raw capitalism. What I know is that all attempts by the Trump administration to paint another picture than what really exists are laughably obvious to anyone who cares to look. The issue is whether they will care to look. I’m guessing that the bottom and base 30% of the population that supports Trump blindly is probably not there under any circumstance. The supposed other 16% that might approve of what he is doing are much easier to sway. Will they be swayed by Sanders or Warren? Many think not, but a growing roster of people think so. Politics in America has recently been proven to be a contrarian’s game. Trump was a contrarian candidate who won contrary to broad opinion. Sanders could easily do the same, especially because of Trump. The next eight months will tell if Sanders has capitalism on the run or if Trump can count on American greed to keep capitalism ahead of socialism.