Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Jeffrey Gedmin

GET UPDATES FROM Jeffrey Gedmin
 

Two Cheers for Capitalism

Posted: 19/02/2013 00:00

Since the 2008 financial crisis bashing banks, bankers and free enterprise has become de rigeur. A current exhibit at the British Museum tells "stories of mismanagement, speculative frenzy, fraud and failure" in Britain from 1700 to present day. The message is ubiquitous. The captains of finance and industry have betrayed us. Free enterprise is failing.

Long before the infamous "greed is good" Gordon Gekko from the 1987 film Wall Street, Hollywood had been churning out sinister corporate villains for decades. The idea of the greedy, exploitative capitalist-obsessing over money, bereft of empathy for his fellow human beings, became embedded in popular culture in the 19th Century. Think Dickens's Scrooge.

I think it's dangerous stuff, these caricatures. Capitalism is indeed in crisis today. We need a way forward. This requires that our gleeful bashers take a breath and back off. For this to happen, free marketeers need to step up.

I believe our biggest problem is a crisis of confidence and a collapse of values. Therefore I propose, before anything else, we endeavour to get agreement around three very basic points:

First, free enterprise works. Socialism and every form of collectivism known to humankind have failed. Even members of the Chinese politburo get this. Tens of millions of people across China have been lifted out of poverty as a result. It's not clever Communism that's doing the trick. Let's fix our capitalism, wisely. Let's be careful that any cure is not worse than the disease.

Second, free enterprise works best when the underlying values are sound. The fact is, certain virtues are timeless. This includes things like patience, savings, and self-reliance. We all have responsibility. At some point, we started to lose our way.

Third, for capitalism to survive, capitalists must show restraint. While most leaders in business and banking have acquitted themselves well these last years, some have not. The behaviour of bad capitalists undermines confidence in the free enterprise system. It damages social cohesion.

Take income inequality. It's unavoidable.

With an important caveat. In his book A Capitalism for the People. Italian economist Luigi Zingales argues that the "public generally accepts this inequality as long as it is not excessive, is seen as part of the system that benefits everyone, and, most importantly, is justified by a principle that a large fraction of the population considers "fair."

Investor Warren Buffett says he favours raising taxes on the rich in the US as a way of boosting the morale of the middle class. It seems that Buffett would agree with Zingales. Buffett gets the zeitgeist. He understands that something is out of sync.

I'm taken by another book, Two Cheers for Capitalism, a volume of short essays published 35 years ago by the American intellectual and editor Irving Kristol. Why two cheers for Kristol, instead of three?

For one thing, Kristol, a former Trotskyist turned capitalist, had come to reject absolutism of any kind. While he heaped scorn on anti-capitalists, Kristol had no time for free market utopians either. He had become a staunch advocate of free enterprise. He also rejected crude oversimplification that can easily lead to dogma and zealotry.

In reference to the oil shocks of the 1970s, when ordinary Americans felt seriously stretched and stressed, Kristol asked whether, when all "those lovely fourth-quarter profits began to roll in," oil companies might have been wise to consider forgoing their increase in executives' salaries.

Which is another way of saying, capitalism can't work when we run big deficits in decency and common sense.

 
FOLLOW UK POLITICS
Since the 2008 financial crisis bashing banks, bankers and free enterprise has become de rigeur. A current exhibit at the British Museum tells "stories of mismanagement, speculative frenzy, fraud and...
Since the 2008 financial crisis bashing banks, bankers and free enterprise has become de rigeur. A current exhibit at the British Museum tells "stories of mismanagement, speculative frenzy, fraud and...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 15
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
13:29 on 20/02/2013
woefully inadequate response. 'backing off' will achieve what? The bankers, and corporations are not 'backing off', indeed in the UK and elsewhere privatisation is still being presented as the only solution, when it is clear that a mixture of private and public ownership actually delivered more services to more people at a better rate. NHs hospitals have endemic MRSA since privatised cleaning just one example, but ask anyone with a stroke patient who needs care and they can tell you that the current 'private' services are pretty poor. (I can offer you examples on request). Finally china has an authoritarian model of capitalism, not 'freemarket' in the least - I'm shocked that you seem to ignore or not know this. There are labour camps, people have to live in dormitories and have a very low standard of living to create the massive income of a (relative) few. It is destroying the chinese traditional culture. So there are problems with you model. And where, oh, where is the regulation for these nice poor 'picked on' tragic capitalists to reign them in? It's an absurd model and (especially in China) as 'absolutist' as the state capitalism. Both are a corporatism too far. Neither really consider what could make a whole society really work. This is a deeply flawed argument, which I'm surprised by as I'm sure you must know the facts about the chinese 'free market'? mystified.
photo
mmartini54
Roll on 2015!
00:03 on 20/02/2013
A very sound article, no sensible person could disagree with the analysis. But 'backing off' is not an option, not until we get proper regulation of the immoral practices running riot throughout capitalist economies, and some kind of check can be put on global corporations to restrain the tyranny of their profit margins. Our government has signally failed to act, as have most, it seems. Why?
18:21 on 19/02/2013
Your first argument however ignores that capitalism has failed, socialism was needed to keep the banking system and thereby the world’s economy afloat, to argue that the very tool of rescue is a failure is slightly ridiculous.
If socialism is so bad and we must steer clear of it why then where free market capitalist shouting for the socialist rescue, capitalism has failed too remember.
We need a completely new system, neither socialist nor capitalist, neither works, because both are corruptible by greed and stupidity, we need a socialist capitalism, where we take the best and what works from both systems to create a new system, if we just let free market capitalism continue then we’re as a people stupid, because it’s failed us too easily, if we don’t learn from our mistakes then the 4 billion years of evolution that went into us is a waste.
lastpost
see biography
14:45 on 19/02/2013
“Two Cheers for Capitalism”
Hip, hip, who would have thought capitalism could capture regulation? Hip, hip, who could have imagined capitalism would one day rule law?

“mismanagement, speculative frenzy, fraud and failure"
Don’t listen darling, they’re playing their theme tune.

“I think it's dangerous stuff, these caricatures“.
How are the public supposed to sleep soundly in their delusions, if they’re sent to bed on a diet of open debate?

“gleeful bashers take a breath and back off”
and let the law (that’s nowhere to be seen) deal with these miscreants?

“I believe our biggest problem is”
denial of what we’re engaged in. Short term strategies, pursued by myopic individuals.
Identify the true path. Then anyone sneaking into the woods to ambush the rest of the tribe, is soon spotted.

“free enterprise works“
But not too well for rhinos, and the like. But hey, they’re expendable like everything/everyone else.

‘every form of collectivism known to humankind”
gets overrun by the same self-acquisitive element, sooner or later. So basically, that’s what destroys systems and needs sorting.

“Let's fix”
the fixers? So the proper operation of civilisation can take care of itself.

“the underlying values”
The meaning of life is life itself, ensuring continuity of the species? Or, every creature for itself?

“we started to lose our way“.
Is that the royal (Bank of Scotland) we?

“for capitalism to survive”
humanity has to be here. Elsewise, that’s all they wrote.

“Take income inequality. It's unavoidable.”
Yet invariably violently correctable?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
vividrick
I came, I saw...I had a cup of tea!
12:58 on 19/02/2013
Well I've inhaled my breath, and I for sure won't be backing off!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JohnDonohue
12:42 on 19/02/2013
Not a chance these three basics will make a shred of difference in the crisis of Capitalism without the decoupling of government control of money. In the USA, the federal government is the dictator of money. They construct it out of the ether, backed only by the promise to borrow enough to pay the current bills and the promise to tax your grandchildren to cover the deficit. They set the interest rate on their "currency" and tax away profit and wages as part of the scheme. They are enmeshed with giant corporations, granting and pulling favors to the point where no one can tell where the company ends and government starts; it is all of an unholy piece.

That is not capitalism. Capitalism requires capital. It cannot eat the refuse of paperhangers.
00:17 on 19/02/2013
A democratic mixed economy works better than state planning.

As for collectivism, no one is stopping anyone from starting co op's in the free markets in democracies.

In Cuba, North Korea and the USSR there was nothing collective, it was state planning and state slavery. The top 1% made all the decisions. The workers had no rights at all.

Whereas in a democracy people are free to leave their jobs and start their own businesses anytime they choose.

Free markets are essentially "people power". People working together, helping each other and following their dreams. Making their own choices at every level.

Socialism is state slavery where the top 1% line their own pockets and the poor work as slaves for them.
photo
novelist2000
veritas non olet
03:27 on 19/02/2013
'Whereas in a democracy people are free to leave their jobs and start their own businesses anytime they choose.' You forgot that you need some capital for starting a business. If you haven't inherited some capital (or had saved up a six figure sum) you can't open a business. You have to sell yourself by the hour. I have been through it, believe me, including a moderate loan from a loan shark to pay out our first partner, for cheating. I came out the other end, my brother had a tragic end.

I was always for the free market etc. Success is built on having the edge - and when you get to see behind the curtain far too often you discover it's just the edge of the smarter fraud. But free market is, of course, here to stay, with the exception of the monopolies, natural and otherwise. Monopolies must have transparency.

Wherever you look in the freed up markets of electricity and gas you find fiddling middlemen. How can families budget if there is no predictability (for this year!) in these fixed costs? People would embrace the free market and capitalism a lot more if some of the basics were more stable.
19:09 on 19/02/2013
 If governments were not borrowing so much from banks then banks would loan to people, most small business are started by people who borrow money.  Energy is not a free market it is a cartel set up by the state. Its a disaster.  
13:32 on 20/02/2013
banking recieves huge subsidies before the bail out. how is that 'free market'? corporations recieve huge subsidies in tax breaks, in tax deals, in tax avoidance, currently in free labout and being paid to take free labout. how is that free market. confused. how can people come together in markets that are effectively rigged to favour large corporations and their buying power and their bargaining power with elite in goverment. flawed arguments I fear.