Another Attempt to Bluff Us All
Tibor R. Machan
Honest intellectual and political economic history is vital to an understanding of society but the sort being peddled by the social democratic left is a distortion of the truth for unabashed ideological purposes.
Tibor R. Machan
Those
aspiring to manage our lives, to take it over and run it according to
their vision, never tire of trying to bluff us into letting down our
guards. Now come Robert and Edward Skidelsky, in a book titled How Much is Enough?
(Allen Lane, 2012), claiming that there’s just too much capitalism
afoot and this must be contained. I assume by them and their pals.
They urge us to re-examine economic growth “as an end in itself,”
without any connection to “what a good life might look like.”
Who
are these blokes kidding? First, most ordinary folks with solid
academic jobs and are not writing widely promoted, prestigious books,
could really use a solid dosage of economic growth these days. If they
got that, they would know readily enough what a good life might look
like--we do not need Skidelsky & Son to instruct everyone about such
matters. Who are these philosopher king types to presume they have an
answer for us all about something that is very closely tied to who and
what we are as individuals and members of various families and
communities of which this father and son team have very little of the
necessary knowledge?
But
of course beating up on an imaginary dominant consumerism and
capitalism has a clear, not so hidden agenda motivating it. Supporters
of the two have chimed in with even more nonsense than they produced in
their book. Thus Larry Elliott in the UK newspaper The Guardian
opined that we would all be so much better off if the stranglehold of
“Anglo-Saxon capitalism” didn’t have us in its grip! What these people
advise is that our lives be modified as follows: “Sprinkle in a bit of
Keynesian liberalism and a pinch of social democracy, and the good
society is within reach.”
Balderdash!
Our lives are already fully ruled according to their vision. We have a
bunch of Keynesian liberalism on both sides of the Atlantic--just
recall the endless stimulus packages we’ve seen recently, following the
Keynesian policies promoted by Professor Paul Krugman and his fellow
statist tinkerers; consider the social democracy that’s been flooding
Europe and the rest of the Western world (Canada, the USA, New Zealand,
Australia, etc., etc.).
The
last thing we have around the globe is the boogie man of global
capitalism. At most we have some cronyism running amuck everywhere, but
certainly no capitalism, with its strict adherence to private property
rights, freedom of contract, personal responsibility for one’s winnings
and losses and no politicians determining who are the winners and
losers.
As
to the malarkey of having “too much” and the need to have this
curtailed by yet another team of elitists eggheads, the idea has been
around since Plato’s Republic
(who didn’t really mean it anyway), and by now we should know better
than to place our trust in these meddlers who would eagerly rule
whatever realm they can dominate with their crackpot opinions.
Consider,
finally, just who the the most widely respected “thinkers” of our area
and of the past two centuries. It is not the champions of capitalism
and economic growth but the social democrats and their ilk who have been
governing most countries around the world since at least FDR’s New Deal
but more likely since onset of swishy-washy welfare statism foisted upon
us by the likes of Otto von Bismarck. While not himself a socialist,
Bismarck certainly gave the idea of statism in matters of economic
security, education, and the like a powerful boost. More to the point,
there hasn’t been much of a bona fide capitalist culture or economy
since Bismarck’s rule in Germany and even America came more under his
influence than that of Adam Smith, not to mention Ludwig von Mises or
Milton Friedman, as intimated by the Skidelsky father-son team.
Honest intellectual and political economic history is vital to an understanding of society but the sort being peddled by the social democratic left is a distortion of the truth for unabashed ideological purposes.
No comments:
Post a Comment