Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Could We Please Stop Calling it “Capitalism?”
The moment we call “capitalism” capitalism, I’ve come to believe, we’ve already conceded far too much ground to the other side, which of course portrays capitalism as a coherent system, imposed on economic life, just as socialism represents a system imposed on producers and consumers from the outside. If we’re simply choosing between two systems, the socialists contend, why choose the one imposed on the rest of us by rich cronies, interested only in their own wealth and power, instead of the system imposed by the government on behalf of ordinary people?
In truth, of course, capitalism represents the absence of any imposed economic system. Instead, it is simply what arises in conditions of freedom — the organic order that establishes itself as people come together in markets, pool their capital, respond to price signals, and so forth. Our choice isn’t between two systems, imposed on the rest of us, one by the rich, the other by the government. Not at all. Our choice is between freedom and coercion. The term “capitalism” obscures that absolutely basic point.
Which is why I found myself struck by one phrase in an email from a friend. He was writing about the pope’s visit, but the pontiff isn’t the issue here. Words — that is the issue here:
Go ask the world’s poor what they want. They want to learn how to achieve a better live for their families. Capitalism is an information and collaboration system.
Information and collaboration. Lovely, no? That’s what we’re talking about when we’re talking about capitalism.
Published in Economics
Free markets versus markets controlled by a few corrupt idiots. I have had good luck explaining the choice that way.
Everyone understands playing in a rigged game, no one likes it.
Another thing in Chomsky’s favor are his attacks on postmodernism. He couldn’t see the Khmer Rouge for the murderous terror that it was, but at least he can see postmodernism for the hooey it is. Frankly, I’ll take a Cambodian tyrant over a pompous, incomprehensible college professor.
Clever idea. I think government-approved punk music is such a vile idea, it would resonate with anyone.
Smith called it “the system of natural liberty”, which encompasses a lot more than just free markets.