Conservatism across the fruited plain is religion careening perilously close to fundamentalism. Not only do many conservatives embrace the one true faith of the free market—whatever denomination that happens to be—but they are also dedicated to absolutes in all things.
Aside from religion, that fervor makes them much like Marxists who wolf down the godless doctrines of communism with absolute certainty. They would never blame capitalism itself for taking it on the chin but would prefer to point to impurities discovered in the spit bucket. To their kind, whenever capitalism falters the failure is always because the free market has an arm tied behind its back.This circular thinking has to be likened to the abstract construct that has always been Marxism—a stew that puts the working class at the center of the universe and preaches historical inevitability that never quite worked out. The intellectual dishonesty of such an approach among communists and conservatives inevitably leads to purification if not outright purges. To solve the woes of capitalism, circa 2009, conservatives have chosen to stamp down on any mechanism to steer business in a better direction. To say otherwise is free-market heresy.
Or so the saying goes.
The difference between the failure of capitalism and the wretched excesses of communism is found in “The God That Failed,” the 1949 book of six essay by The six contributors were Louis Fischer, André Gide, Arthur Koestler, Ignazio Silone, Stephen Spender, and Richard Wright. Lefties all, all six ultimately changed their minds about communism and had the wisdom to admit it.
Expect no such conversions from the right about capitalism. Is it no accident that Adam Smith published “Wealth of Nations,” their free-market Bible, in the year 1776? Or that he foresaw the need for a firm hand from a sovereign government. All that has been hopelessly lost in conservatism’s non-existent critique of capitalism, where all fingers point back in time to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—and never forward to overleveraged Wall Street firms, banks, and investors. Only Alan Greenspan, the former Fed chairman now vilified by both sides, is ready to admit that the greed of the Street confounded him.
When it comes to capitalism under a putatively conservative administration, the emperor may have had no clothes but the God of the Free Market was buck naked. When the markets sneezed the whole world caught cold.
Is Failure anti-American?
The irony to the above story is that pure capitalism must permit failure therefore the existence of failures in the capital markets and economies does not betray capitalism or its ideals.
i ask is failure anti-american? Because one of the paradoxes of the federal government’s hyper-motivation to help us is that it has sent federal bank examiners to every bank in america and bullied them into moving performing loans into their loan-loss portfolios- thus chilling the credit markets further. why? because everybody hates bank failures.
in the medical profession, one adage is that ‘intervention leads to more intervention’. a federal government-related corolllary is the law of unintended consequences.
as a capitalist, i think it naiive to put our salvation in the hands of politicians.
Marcos:
I think failure is in fact un-American. We’re built for sucess and built to avoid pain.
The larger question is: Would the failure of AIG, Citibank, et al have led to a global collapse.
Maybe we’ll never know, but the fear of catastrophic failure seems to be driving our response to the crisis.
Best, Michael!
[We're built for sucess and built to avoid pain.]
Spoken like a chronic sufferer of gout.
[Would the failure of AIG, Citibank, et al have led to a global collapse?]
Yes.
Geithner may know where bodies are burried, but he doesn’t have a clue about the scope of this problem. When it’s all said and done, he can share a parasol adorned Mai Tai with Barney Frank and piece it all together.
Cheers,