Liberty MavenMichael Moore: It’s not Capitalism, silly man; It’s Corporatism
September 25th, 2009 8:10 am | by Marc Gallagher | Published in Bailouts, Big Government, Commentary, Economics, Free Market, Individual Responsibility, Liberty, Market Regulation, Maven Commentary, Money, Philosophy, jobs | 17 Responses
Michael Moore utilizes a word in the title of his new movie to elicit praise and respect from his Left-leaning fans and derision from his Right-leaning critics. Unfortunately for all of us, he uses the wrong word to describe his movie’s subject matter. It’s not capitalism, silly man; it’s corporatism. Therefore, I refuse to call his movie anything but what its true title should be: “Corporatism, A Love Story“.
Let’s head to Merriam-Webster to clear this up. Which one of the following best describes America today?
capitalism: an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market.
corporatism: the organization of a society into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and exercising control over persons and activities within their jurisdiction.
The correct answer is, of course, corporatism. A key phrase in the definition of capitalism is “by investments that are determined by private decision“. How do government bailouts of private industry reconcile with this definition? They don’t. And if you think this is a recent phenomenon then I urge you to consider the Savings and Loan bailouts back in the 80’s and 90’s.
Another assertion in the definition of capitalism that does not compute in America today is that the prices, production, and distribution of goods are supposed to be determined by a free market.
A free market does not exist when we have the Federal Reserve artificially holding interest rates low, heavy government regulation of industries, and government subsidies that bastardize the natural rules of supply and demand. We haven’t had a free market in the United States for a very long time. Capitalism can not exist without a free market.
What we have in America is corporatism. And this is the essence of what Michael Moore is railing against in his new film. Unfortunately, he doesn’t offer useful solutions because he doesn’t even understand the problem.
The big corporations hire lobbyists to protect their own interests in their respective industries. The lobbyists go to Washington, D.C. and influence lawmakers to pass laws that give special advantage to the corporations. So, in essence what we have is corporations cozy in bed with the government while Joe Citizen sleeps naked on the floor.
The only sensible solution to this problem is to set the market free. In a free market Joe Citizen consumer has the power. He votes with his dollars. Badly run businesses fail because there just aren’t enough people voting with their dollars to keep them afloat. Well run businesses flourish and create opportunity for Joe Citizen and higher growth in production for the country as a whole. As a result less people are unemployed and innovation is encouraged.
Certainly some will fall through the cracks and will need help. This is why churches and charitable organizations exist. It is what they do best. They have a more natural incentive to help and will always do a better job than some government program.
It’s strange that Michael Moore believes that more government is the solution to a problem that is being made worse by that very same government. Moore got one out of three right. He is good at telling everyone about the problem. He confuses people by calling the problem something it’s not. His solution to the problem actually is part of the problem in the first place.
Granted, there’s never a “perfect” solution, but there is a “best” solution. It’s the free market silly man, not more government.
———————————–
For more on Capitalism vs. Corporatism see this excellent piece from a year ago from Radley Balko at Reason.com.
Follow LM on Twitter
September 25th, 2009 at 10:17 pm (#)
Yeah I hate when titles are misleading. Like the time when I read Atlas Shrugged, it had nothing to do with Greek gods or even shrugging for that matter. I hate dumm peepol.
September 26th, 2009 at 4:01 am (#)
Oh but it did… or do you not get the metaphor?
September 26th, 2009 at 4:21 am (#)
I don't believe you've read Atlas Shrugged.
September 27th, 2009 at 3:53 pm (#)
metaphor….hmmmmm….
September 27th, 2009 at 5:59 pm (#)
Just having some fun. I do think this article makes a valid point.
October 13th, 2009 at 5:49 pm (#)
Michael Moore is a silly man. But capitalism, (the 'free market') is an equally silly system.
At least for 90% of the nation. The top 10% who control 80% of the nations wealth are quite justified in supporting it, as they directly benefit from it. But given that the vast, vast majority of us could never dream of obtaining such wealth, asserting that Capitalism is an unjust mode of economy is, by all means, a valid claim.
Although, in America we are all created equal, right?
There will be no proletariat uprising, due to the little class distinction, right?
Those in the top ten percentile earned their money, right?
It is amazing to me how many people buy into their own oppression.
October 13th, 2009 at 6:05 pm (#)
Sounds like you _are_ buying into your own oppression, and not understanding capitalism, all at the same time.
I think the biggest mistake people make is to believe or assume that we have capitalism in this country. (At best we have a mixed economy).
If capitalism is "silly", then what's a better alternative?
October 14th, 2009 at 1:25 am (#)
I'm not buying into buy own oppression. I fully recognize the extent to which I am being oppressed.
"I think the biggest mistake people make is to believe or assume that we have capitalism in this country."
How are we not a capitalist nation? Please elaborate.
Regardless, a better alternative would be for people to make money based on the products they produce. Rather than producing X ammount of merchandise, generating X ammount of profit, and then having the vast majority of the profit that THEY earned stolen from them by the lazy elite, they should get paid for what THEY work for. The majority of the elite were born into affluence. It is just a fact.
In America, those born poor are far more likely to ammount to poverty, and those born into affluence are far more likely to grow up to be rich.
Is this because the poor are biologically predisposed to be lazy? That wouldn't make sense.
As it stands, a black person is far more likely to grow up to be poor than a white person.
Is this because black people are biologically predisposed to be lazy? Well, that doesn't make much sense either.
So if the classes aren't divided on the basis of predisposition, and their not divided on the basis of individual work, than how are they divided?
On the basis of luck! On the basis of inequality! ON THE BASIS OF OPPRESSION!!!
No offense, but as a white-male it may be hard to discern the nature of your own advantages. Seriously, though, I don't mean to offend you with that.
My dad was one of the rare cases that was born into immense poverty and grew up to possess vast wealth. He is a CEO. But lucky for him, he was also a white male. Given the nature of the capitalist system, being white and being male automatically gives you far greater odds of success. If my dad had been born a poor colored, female, and made all the same life decisions, chances are he still wouldn't be a CEO. I say this because, statistically speaking the heterosexual white male has the best odds of success in our nation. Not due to any biological perdisposition that makes them superior, but because that is how a heirarchy is maintained.
October 14th, 2009 at 3:01 am (#)
Huh?
Clearly you do not know the definition of Capitalism
From wikipedia:
"Capitalism can be based on the premises of laissez faire, where private individuals and businesses fire and hire wage laborers, or exchange goods and services without intervention from the State– hence the terms "unfettered capitalism" or “free market.”"
Now, what U.S. Industry is free from intervention from the State?
October 14th, 2009 at 8:20 pm (#)
I agree we don't have pure capitalism, in the same way that we are not a pure democracy. But that isn't to say we aren't a capitalist state. If our economy isn't capitalist, than what do you propose it is? Yes, there is some government control, and we thereby do not have a pure free-market. No system of government or economy on this planet is pure, so that seems to be an irrelevant point. However, regardless of whether or not our country is 100% capitalist in that the government has no intervention whatsoever in corporations, in that pure monopolies can't be formed, and so forth is beside the point. If there were totalitarian intervention on behalf of the state, we would be communist. If there were extensive intervention, but not totalitarian, then we would be socialist. There is less intervention in business in America than in any other country. Thus, you could say, we are the most capitalist state. Do deny that our mode of economy is capitalist, due solely to the fact that, while we do have some government intervention but far less in comparison, is silly. For that matter we might as well never label any system of government or economy, as historically speaking, they never corrospond 100% with the written intentions. So, Fidel Castro wasn't a communist. Sweden isn't socialist. Barack Obama sure as hell isn't socialist either then (not like he was anyway). Make sure to tell all your conservative friends the good news! Hell, lets apply the same rule to religion as well. I suppose Ghandi wasn't a real Hindu then, as while he was devout in most senses, he was emphatically opposed to the Caste System.
Pure Marxism has never existed. Yet, we still consider Cuba to be communist.
Pure anarchism is impossible. Yet, many indigenous tribes are considered egalitarian.
We don't have a pure free-market. But we are still a capitalist nation.
Regardless, none of that matters, as my point is that capitalism doesn't work because the rich get richer while the poor get poorer. I'm thankful America isn't purely capitalist. Then the top 1% would hold even more wealth, while a greater number of hard-working individuals would starve to death due to the inequalities that capitalism creates.
October 14th, 2009 at 8:28 pm (#)
I agree we don’t have pure capitalism, in the same way that we are not a pure democracy. But that isn’t to say we aren’t a capitalist state. If our economy isn’t capitalist, than what do you propose it is? Yes, there is some government control, and we thereby do not have a pure free-market. No system of government or economy on this planet is pure, so that seems to be an irrelevant point. However, regardless of whether or not our country is 100% capitalist in that the government has no intervention whatsoever in corporations, in that pure monopolies can’t be formed, and so forth is beside the point. If there were totalitarian intervention on behalf of the state, we would be communist. If there were extensive intervention, but not totalitarian, then we would be socialist. There is less intervention in business in America than in any other country. Thus, you could say, we are the most capitalist state. To deny that our mode of economy is capitalist, due solely to the fact that, while we do have some government intervention but far less in comparison, is silly. For that matter we might as well never label any system of government or economy, as historically speaking, they never corrospond 100% with the written intentions. So, Fidel Castro wasn’t a communist. Sweden isn’t socialist. Barack Obama sure as hell isn’t socialist either then (not like he was anyway). Make sure to tell all your conservative friends the good news! Hell, lets apply the same rule to religion as well. I suppose Ghandi wasn’t a real Hindu then, as while he was devout in most senses, he was emphatically opposed to the Caste System.
Pure Marxism has never existed. Yet, we still consider Cuba to be communist.
Pure anarchism is impossible. Yet, many indigenous tribes are considered egalitarian.
We don’t have a pure free-market. But we are still a capitalist nation.
Regardless, none of that matters, as my point is that capitalism doesn’t work because the rich get richer while the poor get poorer. I’m thankful America isn’t purely capitalist. Then the top 1% would hold even more wealth, while a greater number of hard-working individuals would starve to death due to the inequalities that capitalism creates.
October 14th, 2009 at 8:44 pm (#)
We are a Corporatist nation, not a Capitalist nation. No we aren't pure Corporatist, and we are nowhere near pure Capitalist. As you imply, these are just labels, but we if we are choosing labels then we should choose them properly.
If we had Capitalism the rich would get richer and the poor would have the opportunity to get richer. With Corporatism the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
A country where the government has the ability to force CEO's to resign, take over automobile companies, buy majority ownership of banks is not a Capitalist country by any stretch of the imagination.
The entire point of the article was to show that calling America capitalist is a misnomer and confuses those less informed into believing that the "free market" is the cause of our troubles when we haven't had a free market (in general) for a very very long time.
Obama may not BE socialist, but so far he's certainly implemented some quite socialist policies. Let me add that George W. Bush implemented some of his own quite socialist policies. America is a mix of Capitalism, Socialism and Corporatism (fascism) back in the late 19th century America could be accurately described as "mostly" Capitalist. Today it seems that America could only be accurately described as "mostly" Corporatist/Socialist with a few industries left that actually operate in a "free market".
Enjoy and thanks for your thoughtful comments,
Marc
October 26th, 2009 at 12:30 am (#)
"If our economy isn't capitalist, than what do you propose it is?"
Did you even read the article?
October 26th, 2009 at 1:09 am (#)
It didn't appear so, did it?
October 26th, 2009 at 6:40 am (#)
Let's go back to bartering, Craig's List can be the new legal tender. This way each person involved in the transaction determines the value of what they give/get.
October 26th, 2009 at 12:09 pm (#)
Your day of disenfranchisement, when you become part of the great American Holocaust, 45 thousand folks, dying in the streets with curable medical conditions, they languor in slums, no doctors attending, no dignity in death, no clean white sheets, not a pleasant farewell to life, not even morphine for pain, and die there! Third World? no, victims of American corporatisms bureaucratic "Selection Committee" Just as the Nazis did, company, corporate, capitalist, figures, directed, hired by the Kings of ROI, the "Shareholders" to protect specifically the ROI of health insurance companies, "select" – not Jews, Europeans, coming off trains at Auschwitz, Americans! All Americans! You and I! In clean, air-conditioned offices, with computers, pretty secretaries, background music, water coolers! Props, to camouflage their deadly duties, on behalf of accountancy equations, not medical considerations, to protect corporate ROI. Daily they "Disenfranchise" Americans, veterans, workers, teachers, pregnant women, Jews too, dying folk, according to the dictates of accountancies profitability equations, set up to extract highest ROI possible. They refuse them “all medical care”, on behalf of very rich major investment corporations (some even Asian in origin!). The corporations run the "Selection" committees in America, not even the more impartial government! Corporatism, the velvet glove on the iron fist, today in America! Your turn, not regulated by government, your number is so coming up! It is in the accountants equations, the "Least Qualified" on this list are stroked off, the list recalculated, and sooner or later, your numer comes up, on an ever-shortening list of "Liabilities" and an ever increasing ROI for shareholders – the object of the whole game! Corporatism! It killed GM(America) has infested GM(China) will strangle them too, then move onto the African continent to wreak havoc there! Meanwhile, the great lovable American Neanderthal, requiring in one day, just to survive, food to feed an Asian for six days, is left behind, American Capital fleeing America , migrating to Asia, converted to "Yuan" to take advantage of the slave-labor , "Third World" conditions there, has left him a victim, America's many unemployable, reminents of the "Smoke Stack Era" and the "Legacy Workers" of industries lost with the recent “Capital flight” to Asia, fill soup kitchens, are bused, prepaid, out of New York City, collect in Shanty-Towns on cities outskirts, with humanured garden plots, eating possum, rodents, they catch and foraging in the night, drinking water from culverts they used to proudly pass by in shiny new Chevrolet's, (SEE: http://uprooted.jessicareeder.com/2009/09/detroit... ) – collecting in "Tent Cities" well hidden from the press, and other nation's eyes, living in Hoovervilles, in trailers, vans, old cars, bunking in with relatives, grandparents, parents, and some even sleep on the streets! The Great American Lie! to be followed by the "Final Extraction' by the corporatists. The dollar, now that the Capitalists are safe on the Beijing, Shanghai, and Hang Seng stock markets, in Chinese "Yuan" backed by the power of the whole Chinese population! feel it is safe to "Cash in" on the American Neanderthal and his remaining riches by steadily collapsing the American Dollar, even from International Currency status, to worthless paper, robbing the Arab Oil Princes in the process, and killing off Britain's life sources, wounding all Euro holdings in America and consolidating in "Yuan" where they feel their fortunes safe from retaliation or challenge! With the "Yuan" now the international currency of trade, these corporatists, consolidated in Yuan, will be very rich, and will take on Africa's resources with American Mercenary muscle , much as they did to capture the worlds oil, and Chinese labor! Poor African, won't see it coming, won't know what in Hell hit him, and the Corporatists will own the world!
As is the norm for even enlightened Americans as found on this page, xenophobia, hegemony reigns supreme as Americans seem to feel that they are the prime targets of all things bad in the world! Not So! These vicious, voracious, killer-barracuda, will screw all but their own ilk, and sometimes even in-fight! and have their sights on every being with its back to the sun, and pounce if it moves!
October 27th, 2009 at 6:40 am (#)
We need to get the government to start living by the constitution. If it wasn't for all the "social programs" that are not within the purview of the Fed. Govt. (Article 1 Section
there would be no deficit, there wouldn't be 100 trillion in unfunded liabilities. If we would only wake up and realize how far we've strayed from the ideals of the founding fathers, we could actually have a smaller, well-functioning, efficient government that focused on their respective jobs as laid out in the constitution.
The problem is the narcissistic, self-absorbed, greedy liars that we call congress. None of them are willing to relinquish one iota of power that they've managed to hoard. The back room deals, the special interests, the lobbyists, they all contribute to the corruption of the idea that was The United States.
If the founding fathers could see what we have become, they would be angry and ashamed that their "great experiment" has been so corrupted, so perverted as to be unrecognizable to them as a "capitalistic republic"
In fact, it is my belief that if the founding fathers could see what this country was to be come in 200 plus years, they may have decided not to rebel against England and King George, They would probably say: "We're not ready for self-rule. Look at what a mess of things our progeny perpetrates on a nation born of our blood, sweat and tears!" "Our struggle for liberty, our suffering for freedom was in vain!"
But all is not lost. There is still the chance we can redeem ourselves in the eyes of the founding fathers. The federal government has too much power. We need good, honest men to serve in congress that can resist the temptation to become self-righteous, power-hungry, professional liars, and truly serve their country to get us back on the right course. Otherwise this "great experiment" of the people, by the people and for the people shall surely perish from this earth.