Why Capitalism Has an Image Problem tells the story:
"Mitt Romney's résumé at Bain should be a slam dunk. He has been a successful
capitalist, and capitalism is the best thing that has ever happened to the
material condition of the human race. From the dawn of history until the 18th
century, every society in the world was impoverished, with only the thinnest
film of wealth on top. Then came capitalism and the Industrial Revolution.
Everywhere that capitalism subsequently took hold, national wealth began to
increase and poverty began to fall. Everywhere that capitalism didn't take hold,
people remained impoverished. Everywhere that capitalism has been rejected since
then, poverty has increased.
Capitalism has lifted the world out of poverty because it gives people a
chance to get rich by creating value and reaping the rewards. Who better to be
president of the greatest of all capitalist nations than a man who got rich by
being a brilliant capitalist?
Yet it hasn't worked out that way for Mr. Romney. "Capitalist" has become an
accusation. The creative destruction that is at the heart of a growing economy
is now seen as evil. Americans increasingly appear to accept the mind-set that
kept the world in poverty for millennia: If you've gotten rich, it is because
you made someone else poorer.
What happened to turn the mood of the country so far from our historic
celebration of economic success? . . . the problem of crony capitalism is trivial compared with the collusion
engendered by government. In today's world, every business's operations and
bottom line are affected by rules set by legislators and bureaucrats. The result
has been corruption on a massive scale. Sometimes the corruption is retail,
whereby a single corporation creates a competitive advantage through the
cooperation of regulators or politicians (search on "earmarks"). Sometimes the
corruption is wholesale, creating an industrywide potential for profit that
would not exist in the absence of government subsidies or regulations (like
ethanol used to fuel cars and low-interest mortgages for people who are unlikely
to pay them back). Collusive capitalism has become visible to the public and
increasingly defines capitalism in the public mind. . . .
The objective changes in capitalism as it is practiced plausibly account for
much of the hostility toward capitalism. But they don't account for the
unwillingness of capitalists who are getting rich the old-fashioned way—earning
it—to defend themselves. . . .
Another factor is the segregation of capitalism from virtue. Historically,
the merits of free enterprise and the obligations of success were intertwined in
the national catechism. McGuffey's Readers, the books on which generations of
American children were raised, have plenty of stories treating initiative, hard
work and entrepreneurialism as virtues, but just as many stories praising the
virtues of self-restraint, personal integrity and concern for those who depend
on you. The freedom to act and a stern moral obligation to act in certain ways
were seen as two sides of the same American coin. Little of that has survived.
To accept the concept of virtue requires that you believe some ways of
behaving are right and others are wrong always and everywhere. That openly
judgmental stand is no longer acceptable in America's schools nor in many
American homes. Correspondingly, we have watched the deterioration of the sense
of stewardship that once was so widespread among the most successful Americans . . . . Capitalists who behave honorably and with restraint no
longer have either the platform or the vocabulary to preach their own standards
and to condemn capitalists who behave dishonorably and recklessly.
And so capitalism's reputation has fallen on hard times and the principled
case for capitalism must be made anew. That case has been made brilliantly and
often in the past, with Milton Friedman's "Capitalism and Freedom" being my own
favorite. But in today's political climate, updating the case for capitalism
requires a restatement of old truths in ways that Americans from across the
political spectrum can accept. Here is my best effort:
{NOTE: THIS NEXT PART IS WORTH READING CLOSELY--VERY CLOSELY--IT DEFINES AND DESCRIBES THE IMPORTANCE OF "EARNED SUCCESS" IN AMERICA.}
The U.S. was created to foster human flourishing. The means to that end was
the exercise of liberty in the pursuit of happiness. Capitalism is the economic
expression of liberty. The pursuit of happiness, with happiness defined in the
classic sense of justified and lasting satisfaction with life as a whole,
depends on economic liberty every bit as much as it depends on other kinds of
freedom.
"Lasting and justified satisfaction with life as a whole" is produced by a
relatively small set of important achievements that we can rightly attribute to
our own actions. (A co-worker) ) has usefully labeled such achievements "earned success." Earned
success can arise from a successful marriage, children raised well, a valued
place as a member of a community, or devotion to a faith. Earned success also
arises from achievement in the economic realm, which is where capitalism comes
in.
Earning a living for yourself and your family through your own efforts is the
most elemental form of earned success. Successfully starting a business, no
matter how small, is an act of creating something out of nothing that carries
satisfactions far beyond those of the money it brings in. Finding work that not
only pays the bills but that you enjoy is a crucially important resource for
earned success.
Making a living, starting a business and finding work that you enjoy all
depend on freedom to act in the economic realm. What government can do to help
is establish the rule of law so that informed and voluntary trades can take
place. More formally, government can vigorously enforce laws against the use of
force, fraud and criminal collusion, and use tort law to hold people liable for
harm they cause others.
Everything else the government does inherently restricts economic freedom to
act in pursuit of earned success. I am a libertarian (NOTE: SO AM I.} and think that almost none
of those restrictions are justified. But accepting the case for capitalism
doesn't require you to be a libertarian. You are free to argue that certain
government interventions are justified. You just need to acknowledge this truth:
Every intervention that erects barriers to starting a business, makes it
expensive to hire or fire employees, restricts entry into vocations, prescribes
work conditions and facilities, or confiscates profits interferes with economic
liberty and usually makes it more difficult for both employers and employees to
earn success. You also don't need to be a libertarian to demand that any new
intervention meet this burden of proof: It will accomplish something that tort
law and enforcement of basic laws against force, fraud and collusion do not
accomplish. . . .
Finally, people with a wide range of political views can acknowledge that
what has happened incrementally over the past half-century has led to a
labyrinthine regulatory system, irrational liability law and a corrupt tax code.
Sweeping simplifications and rationalizations of all these systems are possible
in ways that even moderate Democrats could accept in a less polarized political
environment.
To put it another way, it should be possible to revive a national consensus
affirming that capitalism embraces the best and most essential things about
American life; that freeing capitalism to do what it does best won't just create
national wealth and reduce poverty, but expand the ability of Americans to
achieve earned success—to pursue happiness.
Reviving that consensus also requires us to return to the vocabulary of
virtue when we talk about capitalism. Personal integrity, a sense of seemliness
and concern for those who depend on us are not "values" that are no better or
worse than other values. Historically, they have been deeply embedded in the
American version of capitalism. If it is necessary to remind the middle class
and working class that the rich are not their enemies, it is equally necessary
to remind the most successful among us that their obligations are not to be
measured in terms of their tax bills. Their principled stewardship can nurture
and restore our heritage of liberty. Their indifference to that heritage can
destroy it. "
Summing Up
The many virtues of capitalism are generally misunderstood and even vilified.
Still, our American values all stem from and are built on the idea of individual "earned success."
Accordingly, capitalism, freedom, morality and other basic American values are inextricably linked.
In simple language, capitalism is the absolute best sytem in the world for enabling freedom loving people to pursue individual "happiness," however that word may be defined by each of us.
Freedom and a self governing capitalistic system provide opportunities for each of us and represent the keys to a full and bountiful life.
Finally, capitalism is the most moral system in the world, although that simple fact is generally left unsaid.
That's really too bad. Let's speak up.
Thanks. Bob.
No comments:
Post a Comment