Please Log in to Vote.
15 out of 16 members found this useful.
Just Whom and What does the economy serve anyway?
Have we just witnessed the death of the free market, laissez-faire economic philosophy that has ruled our country for so long? The one that brought us so close to a corporate/governmental fascist state that we might as well have all started polishing our jack-boots, to march together as good Christian soldiers as to war, to keep the world safely in the hands of the multinational conglomerates, whose only moral and legal duty is to amass profit any way they can? Well, I sure hope so.
To me, the most telling moment was when Alan Greenspan told the members of the House committee that was grilling him that he had miscalculated and had thought that “self-interest” would keep the banking industry honest. He might as well have said, “That’s how Ayn Rand told me it would work.” Greenspan studied with Rand as a young man, and brought this quasi- religious faith in free markets, and hero worship of the wealthy Atlases, to his reign as head of the Federal Reserve. Along with this, he also had a hatred of unions and a conviction that the working class should be kept in check, living from paycheck to paycheck, in order to be the workforce that supplies the brute strength to build the palaces and temples of the free market demi-gods to whom all praise and deference must be given.
To hear him say, “Oops, I got it wrong” was devastating to the cult of the Free Market and the practice and philosophy that has ruled our economic life as a nation for the last thirty years. The story went something like this: If everyone simply puts their own self-interest first, things will naturally sort themselves out. The cream will rise to the top and be able to hire lots of willing servants (the middle class) to do the cream’s bidding, and as for the poor… well, fuck the poor. And if the poor weren’t such stupid, lazy bastards, they wouldn’t be poor. And so it went… The evil genius of it was that through demagoguery and playing on people’s prejudices and fears, the servants were persuaded to support this system of class warfare and vote against their own interest for decades.
As it became increasingly clear that the foundations of the system (infrastructure, health, education, environment) were beginning to crumble, the mantra became, “Cut taxes!” Cut taxes for the Atlases and demi-gods that have risen to the top because of their genetic and moral superiority. Then they will be able to hire more servants to man their castles and build their yachts and fight their wars… And, by the way, fuck the poor–they deserve it! And so it went for many dark years. And, by the way, this was freedom and let freedom ring in Jesus’ name. Amen.
To hear George W., preaching at the economic summit in Washington a few days ago, about the virtues of this system that has to be bailed out to the tune of a trillion dollars and counting, is like having a medieval pope say that if we just paid a few more indulgences, and prayed at the bones of a few more saints, the black death would go away for sure. Well, the bones and indulgences didn’t do shit. And in this massive void, left by the Church’s gross ignorance and self-righteous blindness, arose the beginnings of modernity and the scientific paradigm.
Are we at a similar point in our economic and cultural evolution? Could be. Could really be. First, we must ask the question whom and what should the economy serve? To me the answer is obvious: The economy should serve Life. Life should not serve the economy, as that is idolatry of the worst sort, and leads to economic collapse, great suffering and environmental devastation. As Teddy Roosevelt said, “Unregulated capitalism leads to absolute corruption.” The goal of a healthy capitalism is to circulate wealth, economic wealth, intellectual wealth, artistic wealth, and spiritual wealth, with the goal of building a strong, secure, vibrant, enlightened middle class, because without that sort of middle class, the institutions of a healthy democracy cannot survive. And we have come damn close to losing it. In addition, the structures and systems must be in place in all four quadrants to bring the poor into that healthy middle class.
And you might ask, “Well, what about the rich, you commie?” Well, what about the rich? Can they or should theses Atlases be preserved in our healthy democracy? Good question. One Supreme Court justice put it this way: “You can have great wealth or democracy, but you can’t have both.” Why? Because if too much wealth is concentrated in the hands of too few, democracy becomes absolutely subverted and corrupted and you end up with the best government that money can buy.
All that is to say, I have no problems with wealthy individuals per se, it is just that the right to accumulate wealth unchecked in the hands of a few should not be absolute, and should be balanced by other values and needs. Just as we as men cannot have our lives run by the dictates of our penises, so ambition and greed must be balanced and checked by higher values. Or, trust me, absolute chaos results.
In a healthy, capitalistic democracy, we balance the rights of the individual against the common good. And how we choose that balance will make us either slaves or free, just or unjust, inspiring or downright depressing. We now have a chance for a new New Deal. The world is watching us with fascination and hope. History and the generations to come will be our judge.
P.S. In the early eighties, I read Milton Friedman. He and Ayn Rand were the gurus of Reaganomics and the mess it turned into. I remember being caught up in Milton’s ideas until he gave Hong Kong as his model of what a totally free market could achieve. He lost me. Drugs and prostitution run by Triads, in conditions of overcrowding that had this Texas boy running scared. Milton lost me there.
Freedom without discipline is bondage. Great wealth in the face of great poverty is a sin, and spiritually damaging to all. Unless we want a future in which the police travel through poor areas shooting down feral, glue-huffing children as they would rabid dogs (as has been done in Brazil), we have got to take care of business. Wake up, Atlases! With great wealth and abilities comes great responsibility. Let us, as free men and women, take the pledge. No one of us is saved until we are all saved. And no one of us is rich until we can all live in dignity.
- Please Login to Add Comments
- show all sub-comments
- Watched Posts Settings
- Report Abuse
Please Log in to Vote.
2 out of 2 members found this useful.
Demise of Capitalism
Posted November 25th, 2008 by Robert MaxwellThank you for your blog. I think that the corporations have been running capitalism since the early 1900's, increasing their control. One particualy odious feature is the privatisation of profit and socialisation of losses. The recent bank bailout is one example, another is Iraq. There was a time that we said that the corporations would fight wars to protect their interests. Wrong! $ 1 billion for an American president, £250 million for A Bristish prime minster and an Austraian prime minister: a pat on the head good johnny, nice johnny. This is much cheaper than the $3trillion it will cost the American taxpayers. The human cost is terrible something like 600,000 Iraqis dead and 5 million refugees plus American and other causualities. The cultural cost to the USA is appauling. Once a shining light, the US was found to be torturers and the keepers of concentration camps. All this to protect corporate profits.
Will capitalism fall? This might just be another blip or we may of entered the Release Phase of the Adaption Cycle. This cycle is in common use in ecology.
It starts with Rapid Growth, this would look like early capitalism. Lots of people working many ideas. Very competitive but any body with a good idea and balls could get a seat at the table. Then it enters the Conservation Phase. The spread of ideas is limited through excessive use of patent and treaty. Takeovers and mergers are the order of the day. All the eneregy is tied up in the system its self. Then suddenly we enter the Release Phase with its sudden loss of structure and order. It is chaotic or seems that way but the energy of the previous system is conserved. Then it enters the Reorganisation Phase were a few trends start to stand out. Then back to Rapid Grow Phase.
How will we know we have entered a Release Phase? I don't know, but an early sign might be when all the usual tools are used without effect. Then we will know that return to business as usual is not an option.
- Please Login to Add Comments
- Report Abuse
.jpg)




Please Log in to Vote.
7 out of 7 members found this useful.
Free Markets?
Posted November 18th, 2008 by Brian OConnellYour post is great. The one thing that stands out is " the death of the free market, laissez-faire economic philosophy". The US has has very short periods in its history of just the basics for a free market. And we prospered. There is a huge misunderstanding out there that people beleive we have had free markets and we work under free maket principles. Austrian economics clearly shows what is needed for a free market and we have not had its principles except for very short periods. So when you hear free markets, do not beleive the person because they beleive there is and has been one, but there clearly hasn't. When a monetary system has a central bank that controls currency, it makes the whole system not modern but a red power oriented system. Sure we have have signs of a modern pattern but only as it serves red. This is a difficult situation because of the seeming powerlessness of individuals to make change or be heard by the few artistocratic families who own the central banks around the world. We need a new monetary system bad. But we as a whole are financially unaware, even most economists since they work off of the Kenyes theory which is a hude factor in our current problems. The difference between austrian and keyes economics is in the Autrian model the market determines value and in the Kenyes market the velocity and momentum of consumerism is what determines value with intervention from the spigots from the private central bankers. In an Austrian economic system we do not have a problem since the market determines confedence instead of the powers that be to keep the system regulated so it does not stop consumerism and thus profit.
The funny thing about Greenspans comment that he thought the companies would act in self interest. But companies do not have a individual self. This came from a major mistake in law in the 1880's when companies were given rights as if it was a idividual. Thus Greenspan and his mistake by believing in the myth that groups show individuality.
Good video on the monetary system: