As I was assembling my thoughts on capitalism: its amoral acceptability (as regulated free enterprise) and at the same time moral repugnancy (as a money-centered ideology of greed), I came to the conclusion that an underlying problem here was the terminology manipulation by the proponents of the capitalist ideology, who are eager to disguise the ugly side of capitalist ethics by identifying it with the normal amoral activity of the market (buying, selling, barter, credit, etc.) and with the appealing concept of freedom, cleverly generalized from the far more questionable concept of “economic freedom.” It was after having reached this conclusion that I suddenly came across an extremely impressive paragraph in the 2009 book Keynes: The Return of the Master by the British historian and political economy professor Robert Skidelsky (1939----), which rings remarkably in unison with the things that I have been saying all along. The present entry is a recognition of that wonderful harmony.
This is how Robert Skidelsky sees the difference in the attitude toward capitalism in Europe and in America. A very keen observation, indeed, even though coming from a comparatively minor source:
“The notion of business life as an arena for the play of the virtues rather than the vices has always had more appeal in the United States than in Europe. What in Europe is pejoratively called ‘capitalism,’ in America is approvingly called ‘the free enterprise system.’ This difference of name is not accidental. In America the usual justification of a free economy is the scope it gives to the spirit of enterprise and its associated activist virtues. In Europe capitalism is so called because it is an engine for the accumulation of capital, driven by acquisitiveness, and kept honest by competition. In the American perspective, capitalism is invested with a kind of ethical splendor; in the more usual European view the ethics need to be provided from outside, which, in practice, has meant the state.” (Robert Skidelsky: Chapter VI: Keynes And The Ethics Of Capitalism, in Keynes: The Return of the Master, 2009.)
The core observation of this remarkably insightful passage is how American capitalism likes to endow itself with ethical value, thus making itself vulnerable to well-deserved criticism from precisely that moral direction. In my soon-to-be-posted entries I shall discuss these issues in some detail, but it should suffice to mention here how two very respectable American economists (by no means of the rabid Ayn Rand type) go over the line in defense of their ward. Although both quotations below date back almost half a century, their currency has not expired, far from that, even if the 2008 economic crisis may have put a damper on their ‘irrational exuberance.’ (I am just making some out-of-context fun of Alan Greenspan’s famous 1996 phrase.)---
Milton Friedman (1912-2006), 1976 Nobel Prize in Economics Laureate, with this mean blow below the belt:
“Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.” (Capitalism and Freedom, 1962. Chapter 1.)
Alan Greenspan (born 1926), Chairman of the FED (1987--2006), is even more explicit in extolling capitalist morality:
“Capitalism is based on self-interest and self-esteem; it holds integrity and trustworthiness as the cardinal virtues and makes them pay off in the marketplace, thus demanding that men survive by means of virtue, not vices. It is this superlatively moral system [!] that the welfare statists propose to improve upon by means of preventative law, snooping bureaucrats, and the chronic goad of fear.” (The Assault on Integrity, 1963.)
Compared to such two giants, who is this Robert Skidelsky that I should be quoting him alongside them? In fact, I will take him over the giants any time. At least, with some help from Keynes, he puts his finger exactly where I see the greatest problem of capitalism today: its self-righteousness ad nauseam. As the title of this entry comes back in focus, I hope that Professor Skidelsky has no objection to my calling him, in benign and appreciative jest, “the mouse that roared.”
This is how Robert Skidelsky sees the difference in the attitude toward capitalism in Europe and in America. A very keen observation, indeed, even though coming from a comparatively minor source:
“The notion of business life as an arena for the play of the virtues rather than the vices has always had more appeal in the United States than in Europe. What in Europe is pejoratively called ‘capitalism,’ in America is approvingly called ‘the free enterprise system.’ This difference of name is not accidental. In America the usual justification of a free economy is the scope it gives to the spirit of enterprise and its associated activist virtues. In Europe capitalism is so called because it is an engine for the accumulation of capital, driven by acquisitiveness, and kept honest by competition. In the American perspective, capitalism is invested with a kind of ethical splendor; in the more usual European view the ethics need to be provided from outside, which, in practice, has meant the state.” (Robert Skidelsky: Chapter VI: Keynes And The Ethics Of Capitalism, in Keynes: The Return of the Master, 2009.)
The core observation of this remarkably insightful passage is how American capitalism likes to endow itself with ethical value, thus making itself vulnerable to well-deserved criticism from precisely that moral direction. In my soon-to-be-posted entries I shall discuss these issues in some detail, but it should suffice to mention here how two very respectable American economists (by no means of the rabid Ayn Rand type) go over the line in defense of their ward. Although both quotations below date back almost half a century, their currency has not expired, far from that, even if the 2008 economic crisis may have put a damper on their ‘irrational exuberance.’ (I am just making some out-of-context fun of Alan Greenspan’s famous 1996 phrase.)---
Milton Friedman (1912-2006), 1976 Nobel Prize in Economics Laureate, with this mean blow below the belt:
“Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.” (Capitalism and Freedom, 1962. Chapter 1.)
Alan Greenspan (born 1926), Chairman of the FED (1987--2006), is even more explicit in extolling capitalist morality:
“Capitalism is based on self-interest and self-esteem; it holds integrity and trustworthiness as the cardinal virtues and makes them pay off in the marketplace, thus demanding that men survive by means of virtue, not vices. It is this superlatively moral system [!] that the welfare statists propose to improve upon by means of preventative law, snooping bureaucrats, and the chronic goad of fear.” (The Assault on Integrity, 1963.)
Compared to such two giants, who is this Robert Skidelsky that I should be quoting him alongside them? In fact, I will take him over the giants any time. At least, with some help from Keynes, he puts his finger exactly where I see the greatest problem of capitalism today: its self-righteousness ad nauseam. As the title of this entry comes back in focus, I hope that Professor Skidelsky has no objection to my calling him, in benign and appreciative jest, “the mouse that roared.”
No comments:
Post a Comment