When was the last time you saw a movie where a businessman
was the good guy? (If you are one of the
dozen or so people who saw the Atlas Shrugged movies, you can sit down
now.) Maybe I’m hanging out with the wrong
people, but it seems to me most of my contemporaries lean anti-capitalist. It gets even worse when I listen to younger
generations. Like our current president,
it seems more fashionable in America today to be a Marxist, socialist, or communist.
This is no accident.
Ask anyone who the father of communism or modern socialism
is, and they will be able to name Karl Marx and explain Marxism in detail.
Next, ask them who the father of capitalism is. I doubt you’ll get the right answer.
I contend the correct answer is again... Karl Marx. Yes, I’m saying that Karl Marx is both the
father of communism AND the father of capitalism. In fact, Karl Marx was the guy who defined capitalism for the masses in a scathing critique of capitalism called Das Kapital. In other words, the word most people use today when describing economic liberty, “capitalism”, is actually a Marxist epithet!
Many would credit Adam Smith as the guy who had the most influence in shaping America's economy. On that I agree. Adam Smith’s book “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations” was conspicuously published in 1776. That date rings a bell, no? But the word capitalism didn't exist in Adam Smith’s day. He never used it!
Many would credit Adam Smith as the guy who had the most influence in shaping America's economy. On that I agree. Adam Smith’s book “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations” was conspicuously published in 1776. That date rings a bell, no? But the word capitalism didn't exist in Adam Smith’s day. He never used it!
If everyone knows what Marxism is, why doesn't everyone
know what Smithism is? Because it’s
not taught. Marxism is taught
everywhere all the time. If you want to
learn about Adam Smith, you have to go looking. If you go to Wikipedia and look up Marxism,
you’ll find plenty. If you go to Wikipedia and look
up Smithism, you’ll get crickets.
Similarly, if you go to Wikipedia and look up communism,
Marxism, or socialism you’ll find exhaustive explanations. If you look really, really, hard you might find
a brief criticism near the bottom of these entries. If you look up capitalism, you’ll find a long
section titled “Criticisms of Capitalism”.
Moreover, most of the entry is laced with subtle and not so
subtle digs at capitalism. This is not
surprising because the word capitalism itself is a straw-man.
How about some of the more modern terms, like Supply Side Economics? You are probably familiar with many
criticisms of supply side economics. But
can you accurately define it? Can you
define its opposite, Demand Side Economics?
·
Supply side economics is the theory that people will
enthusiastically SUPPLY their efforts and capital if they are free to realize
the rewards.
·
Demand side economics is the theory that people
will enthusiastically DEMAND the efforts and capital of others if they are
subsidized to do so.
These are opposite approaches for achieving economic goals: Supply Side seeks to optimize overall economic
vitality (Smithian). Demand Side at
times seeks to stimulate economic consumption (Keynesian stimulus), and at times
to achieve egalitarianism (Marxist redistribution).
If you look up supply side economics on Wikipedia, you’ll
find a thorough entry. You’ll also find
plenty of criticisms. Look up demand side
economics, and you’ll find nothing. No
definition, and certainly no criticism. Again,
the language is controlled by anti-capitalists. (I made an attempt to define Demand Side Economics in a tongue-in-cheek
cartoon a while ago: See it here. (language warning!))
I understand why Marxists, communists, socialists, and Keynesians
use Marx’s term, capitalism, for our economic system. What I can’t understand is why others use the
term also.
I’d love to see supporters of economic liberty use terms
like Smithist, Smithism, Smithian or just plain "liberty" to describe their ideas. Let the critics argue against economic liberty for a
change!
Let them argue against liberty -- EXACTLY!
ReplyDelete