Jon Talton: Do Americans Support Capitalism, and Which Capitalism?Roundup: Media's Take
I’m being asked to participate in a debate on whether America’s economic system should remain capitalist or embrace socialism.
Only in Seattle, right?
Yet a new Rasmussen Poll found only 53 percent of respondents nationally believe capitalism is the superior system. Another 20 percent favored socialism, while 27 percent were undecided. What’s interesting about the results, as the Web site FiveThirtyEight pointed out, is that support for capitalism is particularly weak among many average workers. A majority of people making less than $40,000 poll less than 50 percent support. Among Americans making $20,000 or less, socialism is only seven points below capitalism as the favored system.
Cries of imminent “socialism” are rampant on conservative talk radio, underscoring Americans’ ignorance and gullability. Most don’t even know what socialism means. Classically, of course, it means that the state owns the means of production, or the “commanding heights” of the economy. In more common parlance today, advocates are speaking of social democracy as practiced in Europe. And even capitalism’s meaning is murky these days — more about this in a moment.
The reality is that American-style capitalism is safe. The Obama administration’s economic policy is, at best, center-right. One of its prime architects, former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, helped craft the deregulated, bubble-dependent economy that ran off the cliff starting in August 2007, and had scoffed at critics who warned what was coming. Now the administration is pushing very hard to save the old system, albeit with more regulation.
The situation was far different in the Great Depression. Then, the situation shared important similarities with today’s mess: a collapse brought on by unregulated speculation, heavy debt, historic levels of income inequality, a burst bubble and the destruction of confidence in the recently eminent business titans and economic thinkers. The conventional wisdom had been shown as a vast fraud. As Franklin Delano Roosevelt improvised with the New Deal, he faced a landscape that was rich with alternatives to capitalism — and widespread public willingness to be done with the moneychangers’ economic system.
By 1933, capitalism was widely dismissed as dead. Fascism had not yet acquired the stench of the charnel house — Mussolini was admired for his accomplishments in Italy, and Germany’s newly elected chancellor, Adolf Hitler, seemed to be a sign of things to come. Although socialism had been dismissed as weak by Lenin, it remained intellectually appealing. And, with the worst genocide of Stalin yet to come, the Soviet Union was considered by many to be a future that worked. These nations appeared to be doing better than a floundering United States. For many Americans, the argument was: fascism or communism?
Of course, FDR saved capitalism — to the everlasting hatred of the far left and the far right — but began building what we might consider post-World War II American capitalism. This was characterized by regulation, anti-trust enforcement, unions, access to college for average Americans, and a progressive tax system, including a stiff estate tax to limit dynasties that could bend the political system to their will. Yet the system of risk-taking, entrepreneurship and business remained. Power was spread widely and pluralized. Meritocracy began its heyday. Average Americans had good jobs with benefits and rising wages. The rich did well, too. This careful balance of interests helped create the greatest middle class in history, and the greatest overall economy. Many Americans now can’t even recall this era.
Starting in the 1980s, this balance was steadily undone, partly by changes in the world but largely by public policy. Industries spent billions to gain more influence in Washington, and they were deregulated and allowed to heavily consolidate. This was particularly true in banking, which morphed into a financial services sector that overtook manufacturing as the dominant “industry” in America. Much of this was cloaked in anti-government, free-market ideology, especially in the Republican Party but parroted by the Clinton/Rubin Democrats. In reality, it was a gamed market, the law of the jungle.
Ill-considered trade deals helped lead to a deindustrialization, while the technology sector was characterized by a skill gap that left most Americans without the traditional ladders up. Executive pay hit astronomical levels as wages for most workers slowed in their growth and stagnated. Unions were successfully busted and demonized — working Americans consistently voting against their self-interest. Job security, benefits and pensions eroded. Yet many Americans still believed they were getting a piece of the action, trading stocks, getting credit cards and flipping houses. In reality, these were bubbles engineered by policymakers, deliberately or not, to conceal the underlying rot. But the smartest people in the economics profession and on CNBC all worshipped at the Church of the Free Market, saying everything was fine.
Then it collapsed, a fraud, a Ponzi scheme.
So when Americans say they support “capitalism,” do they even know which capitalism? When they rage against the bonuses at AIG, are they outraged at the loss of balance in the American system — or are they just envious? Would all be forgiven if we could return to 2005, or 1999? After all, most Americans supported the rise of the current system through hundreds of votes, at the ballot box for “free market” candidates or promises of tax cuts, and at the cash registers of anti-worker companies such as Wal-Mart. Now many have lost their retirement nest eggs, but do they even know why? Not for nothing did the Church of the Free Market arise simultaneously with the spread of the “gaming” industry. As with the love of tax cuts, Americans believe in a free lunch, in unearned wealth.
On top of this wild ride, Americans don’t learn history any more. No wonder many are willing to scream socialism (or, as I get it in email form SOCIALISM!!) if Democrats even proposed restoring some balance to the system. More importantly, it grows more clear every day that the financial sector and transnational companies have taken over the government, the opposite of socialism. So I don’t think Americans need fear a departure from the unsustainable capitalism of the past 25 years. Instead, they will face the consequences of more or less keeping the current system.
Meanwhile, most will remain ignorant of social democracy in Europe. It’s been successfully demonized by the same “free market” crowd and the fact that most Americans just don’t know much of the world (or even of their own country). Western Europe resisted the Obama stimulus measures because it already has a strong social safety net — unlike the minimal American system, frayed further by years of tax cuts, which so much of the stim money is going to backfill. Europe already spends heavily on infrastructure such as high-speed rail, which will likely remain a dream here. Germany — with all those nasty unions — is the world’s largest exporter of goods. That was a distinction long held by America.
But that, of course, was another America.
comments powered by Disqus
- Trump administration says joint UNC, Duke Middle East Studies program portrays Islam too positively
- What White Kids Learn About Race in School
- Frederick Douglass photos smashed stereotypes. Could Elizabeth Warren selfies do the same?
- Chronicling New York’s Muslim History
- New Documents Illuminate The University of Texas’s Secret Strategy to Keep Out Black Students
- Women Scientists Were Written Out of History. It’s Margaret Rossiter’s Lifelong Mission to Fix That
- Allen C. Guelzo Reviews Sidney Blumenthal's Latest Installment of His Biography of Lincoln
- What Reconstruction-Era Laws Can Teach Our Democracy: The NY Times Reviews Eric Foner's Latest Book
- Should historians read their own book?
- Cokie Roberts, Pioneering Journalist Who Helped Shape NPR, Dies At 75