How free market ideology backfired, sabotaging capitalistic democracy

[mmonk]

A little history: The core principles of conservative economic ideology are grounded in Nobel economist Milton Friedman's 1962 classic "Capitalism and Freedom." Too late to stop President Lyndon Johnson's Great Society, those principles became the battle cries energizing conservatives since Reagan: Unrestricted free markets, free enterprise and free trade; deregulation, privatization and globalization; trickle-down economics and trickle-up wealth to an elite plutocracy destined to rule the new American capitalist utopia.

-snip-

It's backfiring! You folks turned our America from a great capitalistic democracy into a meddling socialist economy. Still you don't get it. You're acting like teen addicts tripping on an overdose of "greed-is-good" testosterone while your caricature of conservative economics would at best make a one-line joke on Jay Leno.

-snip-

Cognitive dissonance simply means most brains cannot see past their own narrow ideologies. They dismiss any data that contradicts their old ideologies. Whether you're a conservative Republican or liberal Democrat, you only hear what you already know is "true." All else is tuned out.

-snip-

Friedman's great conservative principles have been commandeered by myopic ideologues whose idea of leadership is balancing the demands of self-interest lobbyists with the need for campaign donations. Unfortunately, a new "change" president won't be enough; there are 537 elected officials in Washington controlled by 42,000 special interest lobbyists.



http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/eleven-reasons-america-new-top/story.aspx?guid=D23E1901-728E-4A3C-99D1-7E80F74C3AE3&dist=SecMostRead

[MichiganVote]

1. Whether the system is capitalist or communist, w/o regulation, some group will

always find a way to bend the winds in their favor. We globally need regulation to impede the greed of those among us who would sacrifice an entire planet for themselves. All the hype about conservative vs. liberal is just that-hype. These elites will walk away with a boatload of cash and leave the rest of us, and our treasury, high and dry.

[mmonk]

2. Yes, the regulatory regime is key. Ideology removed much of

it here. Everyone seems to forget they were put into place for a reason. Then before too long, we are reminded why.

[MichiganVote]

6. We never seem to learn that enough to make it stick.

[mmonk]

14. We sure don't.

We run into problem after problem when we gut and deregulate so one would think people would get a clue. I guess that promise of becoming rich never comes but is too enticing to not keep doing it.

[MichiganVote]

27. Yup. Some people need either more religion or more regulation than others.

The current bunch in office need more of both. Sad state of affairs for the grand experiment of democracy.

[PDJane]

3. Why is Socialist a Bad Word?

The truth of the matter is that socialist economies thrive. They have less crime, are less materialistic, and tend to live better lives.

Friedmanite capitalism has been a wash....and there are good reasons for it.

[mmonk]

4. Because most market people are a hard right lean.

Myself, I'm not ideological. I say take what works and discard what doesn't and have the right regs to keep it at a smooth teal. But whatever you choose, keep the people and their welfare in mind.

[DailyGrind51]

5. Too many confuse "socialism" with "communism" and think of

the failed Soviet Union, which the "right" constantly uses as prime example of why it won't work. All of our NATO allies enjoy some degree of socialism to the great satisfaction of their citizens. Granted, they may pay up to 50% of their income on taxes, but they receive secure pensions, guaranteed health-care, and five weeks paid vacation. When you include federal, state, and local taxes, Americans pay around 40% of our income on taxes, and we receive squat!

It took me ten years to recover financially, even with BC/BS coverage, from a two-year cancer treatment protocol back in the early 1980s. My Czech girlfriend's dad endured six years of treatment for metastatic cancer in Prague and, monetarily, it didn't cost them anything.

[DangerDave921]

8. Thrive?

Yup, just like in the old Soviet Union. All those folks were thriving. But then if they were thriving, why all the poerty? And the black market for basic essentials?

[PDJane]

10. Because communism ISN'T socialism.

Canada, Sweden, France, Germany, and too many others to name are socialist democracies. The old soviet union was a communist country, and anything but a democracy. Sort of like the direction the US is heading.

[DangerDave921]

11. USSR was not communism

Communism is the means of production being owned by the people. Socialism is when the means of production are owned by the government. USSR was not communism. It was heavy-handed government ownership/control of the means of production. There was virtually no free market or private enterprise (save the black market).

The countries you name are not socialist. They are more like regulated free markets.

Socialism is a disaster.

[PDJane]

13. Actually, socialism advocates state control of key assets too;

The essentials of life, like medical care, electricity and water are best controlled by the state.

Communism advocates a classless society in which the commons gives control of the means of wealth and production to the state....or, alternatively, a single party state, depending on whose version you follow, marxist-leninist or other.


In essence, there isn't supposed to be a free market. The switch from communism to friedmanite free market principles is what really destroyed the communist state.

Canada and most Nato partners of the US are social democracies, and have fairly strict regulations compared to the US.

[DangerDave921]

15. I don't want

the essentials of my life being controlled by the state.

[PDJane]

18. The essentials of everyone's life

are controlled by the state. I want to be able to vote on the essentials, and I want a state that looks out for the interest of the commons.

Socialism tends to do that. The US's version of crony capitalism is actually socialism for the rich.

[DangerDave921]

19. safety nets are fine

But having the state provide essentials for everyone is an awful idea. Why would you want to turn over your freedom to the state?

[PDJane]

22. Oh, get serious.

the essentials of life...water, electricity, some food production, and medical care are better supplied without the addition of profit. It has nothing to do with freedom, it has to do with the rights of the commons.

[DangerDave921]

23. Nope

Essentials of life? Why not include a house in your list? Why not include a car? Why not include clothes? Heck, why shouldn't the government provide me everything to live on?

[PDJane]

24. Because that would be communism.......

and you hate that, right?

[fascisthunter]

21. "Socialism for the Rich"... you nailed it

[mudesi]

25. Fine. Privatize the police and fire department

Then privatize road and infrastructure maintenance. No more need for public libraries. Or schools. Privatize them all. If you can't afford education, tough.

You don't need social security, either. Scrap that.

[Tesha]

31. Yes, far better the essentials be controlled by corporations over which you have no control...

...whatsoever, ehh?

Tesha

[readmoreoften]

30. Communism doesn't really advocate giving wealth and production to the state.

"Communism advocates a classless society in which the commons gives control of the means of wealth and production to the state...."

Both Marx and Lenin advocate an overthrow of capitalists and their tool, the elitist liberal democratic political system which purports to represent "the people" while doing its bidding for the capitalist. Both advocated, beyond this, a temporary dictatorship of the proletariat, a transitional period where those outside the investor class seize control of the capitalist state apparatus to dismantle it. As society slowly transitions towards economic equality, the state "withers away." Lenin and Marx defined the State solely as an entity that serves to protect the assets of the capitalist. To say that ML wanted wealth seized by the State is untrue. Social democracy (not socialism) wants wealth seized by the State for the purpose of creating a military that will protect the assets of the rich and create social programs to ameliorate the worst conditions of the poor. This is not socialism. (Although it is know known as "socialism.") M/L believed that the State was the major tool of oppression over the working class, advocated the disbanding of the militaries, and the arming of all working class individuals.

I've always found the ML label fairly bizarre because even Stalin and Trotsky considered themselves "ML." You are absolutely correct though with the comment that the switch to Friedmanite capitalist principles is what destroyed the economies of communist nations.

[Atman]

17. The American people have been trained to BELIEVE it's a dirty word

Our collective intelligence (or lack thereof) means that we'll never even look at how much of Europe exists and has managed to do so for so long that our minuscule 232 years as "America" look like a pimple on their ass. We don't analyze. We just suck in all the bullshit we're "taught" and never bother to comparison shop or even read the ingredients label.

.

[fascisthunter]

20. because the greedy do not get to pilfer society

and become as rich as easily?

[MsTryska]

7. I wish we were Socialist actually

A little socialism is a good thing, imo.

I'm glad this guy is calling it liek he sees it, but his grammar puts me off, and makes me take him less seriously.


Either way, I'm glad he's calling it, altho I think he's mistaken on what socialism really is.

[lifesbeautifulmagic]

9. I don't think things will ever change until we address one of the major

causes, which is the way our elected officials finance their campaigns. In fact, I don't think solutions to health care, the environment and a myriad of other problems will be found until we get the corp. money out of politics. IMHO only.

[anonymous171]

12. Deregulation is an anti-competitive practice that only helps the big corporations

while hurting small business.

[mmonk]

16. And they have the money to buy our elected officials and parties.

[DailyGrind51]

26. To use a boxing analogy,

deregulation is like removing weight classes for tournaments so that a heavy weight could be pitted against a bantam weight and calling it "competitive".

[LostInAnomie]

28. The free market ideology didn't fail.

It did exactly what it was supposed to do: put enormous amounts of money into the pockets of very few and make sure it is entrenched there for generations. That has always been their ideology.

[readmoreoften]

29. Exactly. This article is ridiculous.

[DailyGrind51]

32. A "free" market is to energy and healthcare policy, what a lynch mob would be for our justice system