peaccenicked
6th March 2002, 21:24
What is CAPITALI$M, Really?
"Capitalism is an economic system in which the means of production are privately owned." Everyone knows this. But just because most businesses are privately owned in this country does not mean what we have is really capitalism. And while more and more people push for privatization of more and more industries-- essentially trying to attain one hundred percent privately owned businesses-- we are moving more toward that definition. However, when one examines the principles that capitalism was founded on, one starts to wonder just what kind of economic system we're really immersed in.
If you're familiar with Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations (1776), you know he thought the system of capitalism would have the business "man" being "led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention." Is that what really happens in America? Sure businesses fail, but never a corporation as big as Chrysler. If they mess up and get into trouble, instead of being weeded out of the system by market forces, the Government comes to their aid subverting the darwinian process of competition. Even my Grolier's multimedia encyclopedia knows "The crux of Smith's argument was that the economic order should be as independent as possible from the political order." This is not the capitalism we live under, we're not even close to that.
We are told that the market dictates what will be made, who will make it and how it will be distributed. But the idea that capitalism can work depends on educated and rational consumers, and that is extremely contestable in this day and age. Today, it seems a corporation can but whatever it wants into a box, and as long as it spends enough money on slick advertising campaigns, people will buy it. They could sell cow manure in a bag, and as long as they market it right, they can command premium prices for it (call it Organatech Natural Fertilizer, and you've turned something that someone paid you to remove from their land into a hot commodity).
People buy all sorts of things all the time that aren't worth anything, and I can't figure out why they don't realize they're being scammed. My Father bought a "New Dodge" Stratus. The car's warranty just ended, it had less than 30,000 miles on it, and the air conditioning compressor went out. It cost him $950, plus he had to rent a car while they worked on it, which cost him close to another thousand. It wasn't the first time he had to rent a car because of the Dodge, either. Once, it was recalled under warranty, and they didn't even give him a car to use. The "New Dodge" cars might look better than the old ones, but if this is any indication of how they're made, they still suck. I went over some railroad tracks in it the other day, and I thought the front end was going to fall off.
In capitalism, the system is supposed to be ordered so that no person or combination of persons can control the market place. Well, let's see, have you ever taken a look at who owns the media? There's a handful of people making the decisions for almost everything you see. It's not exactly a monopoly, but it may as well be.
More often than not, capitalism in reality is based more on collusion rather than competition. As is the case with ADM and the price fixing scandal, it is obvious that many companies commit similar acts of conspiracy or other trust violations. And in a society that values freedom and accepts it as given, rarely is the question of choice ever scrutinized. Do we really have a choice if we get to choose between Coke or Pepsi? In that case perhaps, but it's not much of a choice. We can drink RC or IBC, or water, but with Pepsi's recent acquisition of Seagram's, perhaps it's only a matter of time between the first choice is the only choice.
Freedom is not given, it must be taken. If you think you have a choice, try boycotting a company like Procter & Gamble, Beatrice foods, or perhaps, Microsoft and see how far you get. If you know all their subsidiaries, you'll find its hard, even for seasoned anti-consumers. For instance, if you're keen you'll notice my e-mail address is a hotmail account. Hotmail = Microsoft. I'm typing on a computer with Windows 95, but using Netscape's Communicator (at least to write this page). But the choice between Netscape and Microsoft's Internet Explorer is a lot like the choice between Coke and Pepsi.
The market is supposed to reward companies that profit, and punish inefficiency, since inefficient businesses should theoretically be put out of business. This again, does not necessarily hold true, depending on what perspective you consider efficiency from. For instance, it is rather inefficient to feed grains to cows which are ruminants, in order to fatten them so that they can be killed and eaten. Because of the laws of thermodynamics, something like 94% of the protein is lost, either excreted, used for energy, i.e., muscle movement, or to grow hair etc.,. Without the government subsidizing water for the beef industry, it's said that a one pound hamburger could cost as much as $32 dollars. Yet the government makes such inefficiency possible, and the USDA does everything it can to promote the consumption of meat.
We live in a society we call a democracy, which in reality is more like an oligarchy or a plutocracy. And we live under an economic system we call capitalism, but in reality it's more like socialism for the rich. There are more mergers and acquisitions than I can keep up with, and corporate power is finding itself strangled by fewer and fewer hands. All of this might make you wonder what's stopping them now that a few large corporation control virtually ever aspect of most people's lives.
"Capitalism is an economic system in which the means of production are privately owned." Everyone knows this. But just because most businesses are privately owned in this country does not mean what we have is really capitalism. And while more and more people push for privatization of more and more industries-- essentially trying to attain one hundred percent privately owned businesses-- we are moving more toward that definition. However, when one examines the principles that capitalism was founded on, one starts to wonder just what kind of economic system we're really immersed in.
If you're familiar with Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations (1776), you know he thought the system of capitalism would have the business "man" being "led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention." Is that what really happens in America? Sure businesses fail, but never a corporation as big as Chrysler. If they mess up and get into trouble, instead of being weeded out of the system by market forces, the Government comes to their aid subverting the darwinian process of competition. Even my Grolier's multimedia encyclopedia knows "The crux of Smith's argument was that the economic order should be as independent as possible from the political order." This is not the capitalism we live under, we're not even close to that.
We are told that the market dictates what will be made, who will make it and how it will be distributed. But the idea that capitalism can work depends on educated and rational consumers, and that is extremely contestable in this day and age. Today, it seems a corporation can but whatever it wants into a box, and as long as it spends enough money on slick advertising campaigns, people will buy it. They could sell cow manure in a bag, and as long as they market it right, they can command premium prices for it (call it Organatech Natural Fertilizer, and you've turned something that someone paid you to remove from their land into a hot commodity).
People buy all sorts of things all the time that aren't worth anything, and I can't figure out why they don't realize they're being scammed. My Father bought a "New Dodge" Stratus. The car's warranty just ended, it had less than 30,000 miles on it, and the air conditioning compressor went out. It cost him $950, plus he had to rent a car while they worked on it, which cost him close to another thousand. It wasn't the first time he had to rent a car because of the Dodge, either. Once, it was recalled under warranty, and they didn't even give him a car to use. The "New Dodge" cars might look better than the old ones, but if this is any indication of how they're made, they still suck. I went over some railroad tracks in it the other day, and I thought the front end was going to fall off.
In capitalism, the system is supposed to be ordered so that no person or combination of persons can control the market place. Well, let's see, have you ever taken a look at who owns the media? There's a handful of people making the decisions for almost everything you see. It's not exactly a monopoly, but it may as well be.
More often than not, capitalism in reality is based more on collusion rather than competition. As is the case with ADM and the price fixing scandal, it is obvious that many companies commit similar acts of conspiracy or other trust violations. And in a society that values freedom and accepts it as given, rarely is the question of choice ever scrutinized. Do we really have a choice if we get to choose between Coke or Pepsi? In that case perhaps, but it's not much of a choice. We can drink RC or IBC, or water, but with Pepsi's recent acquisition of Seagram's, perhaps it's only a matter of time between the first choice is the only choice.
Freedom is not given, it must be taken. If you think you have a choice, try boycotting a company like Procter & Gamble, Beatrice foods, or perhaps, Microsoft and see how far you get. If you know all their subsidiaries, you'll find its hard, even for seasoned anti-consumers. For instance, if you're keen you'll notice my e-mail address is a hotmail account. Hotmail = Microsoft. I'm typing on a computer with Windows 95, but using Netscape's Communicator (at least to write this page). But the choice between Netscape and Microsoft's Internet Explorer is a lot like the choice between Coke and Pepsi.
The market is supposed to reward companies that profit, and punish inefficiency, since inefficient businesses should theoretically be put out of business. This again, does not necessarily hold true, depending on what perspective you consider efficiency from. For instance, it is rather inefficient to feed grains to cows which are ruminants, in order to fatten them so that they can be killed and eaten. Because of the laws of thermodynamics, something like 94% of the protein is lost, either excreted, used for energy, i.e., muscle movement, or to grow hair etc.,. Without the government subsidizing water for the beef industry, it's said that a one pound hamburger could cost as much as $32 dollars. Yet the government makes such inefficiency possible, and the USDA does everything it can to promote the consumption of meat.
We live in a society we call a democracy, which in reality is more like an oligarchy or a plutocracy. And we live under an economic system we call capitalism, but in reality it's more like socialism for the rich. There are more mergers and acquisitions than I can keep up with, and corporate power is finding itself strangled by fewer and fewer hands. All of this might make you wonder what's stopping them now that a few large corporation control virtually ever aspect of most people's lives.