More government oversight? Capitalist, regulate thyself.
| Kirkland, Wash.
Though they may not be ready to embrace socialism by name, many Americans are experiencing a general shakiness in their faith in capitalism. In the midst of congressional debates over healthcare, cap and trade, and new financial regulations, they鈥檙e rightly asking: Does the profit motive provide appropriate solutions to all problems? Does the criterion of 鈥渨inning or losing鈥� apply to all socioeconomic circumstances?
The questions apply to other areas not dominating the headlines, such as the justice system. If healthcare shouldn鈥檛 be denied on financial grounds, isn鈥檛 it equally objectionable that 鈥渏ustice鈥� improves with high-powered (and expensive) legal representation? Life savings can evaporate in legal fees as easily as in hospital fees.
Even further from the headlines, is our culture of 鈥渇ree鈥� expression 鈥� the speech, images, and music dominating media 鈥� the best imaginable? Considering their importance for cultural wellbeing and upliftment, we might question our 鈥渨hatever sells鈥� approach. In his recent documentary, 鈥�Capitalism: A Love Story,鈥� Michael Moore distinguishes between democracy and 鈥渆vil鈥� capitalism, but they are related practices. Our culture reflects people鈥檚 choices, voting with their purchases.
Mr. Moore鈥檚 ire for Wall Street greed is understandable. But be wary whenever someone nominates another abstract enemy 鈥� the war on drugs, the war on poverty, the war on illiteracy, the war on terrorism (and countless other 鈥渋sms鈥�)鈥� the war on capitalism? Sincere citizens want to correct these problems, but there is often an insidious self-deception in the way we frame the issue, as though we confront an independent entity completely removed from our choices and actions as individuals or societies. How often does victory in such 鈥渨ars鈥� have something of the futile elusiveness of shadow-boxing?
Capitalism and democracy are not about getting the best of anything 鈥� sometimes they come close, but that鈥檚 not the criterion. They tend to give us only what the majority wants 鈥� that鈥檚 it. It puts the onus on us. Therefore, we should be equally distrustful of blaming capitalism or overcrediting it. Such either/or thinking runs into the ditch of polarized, name-calling politics: Who鈥檚 to blame, lenders or borrowers? Do we have to choose?
Sports competition is often a metaphor for capitalism. Coaches with a 鈥渨inning is everything鈥� attitude are admired. But one thing should be clear by now: Winning should not be the only criterion. It is estimated that the top 20 financial corporations in this country control 70 percent of US financial assets, up from 12 percent in 1990. Projected to its logical conclusion, do we eventually arrive at a champion? Then what?
The same faith in competition rules the courts. In an adversarial system, the lawyer鈥檚 objective is winning, not truth per se. Regulations to rein in abuses create new hurdles in the contest. Loopholes will always be found by those intent on doing so. Nothing overrides intent, which is why faith in new laws or systems must be tempered. With pure motive, the old rules, or no rules at all, would probably work just fine. Without pure motive, does the system really matter?
Our founding fathers understood that freedom without virtue is an alluring illusion. Our contemporary ideas on freedom need critical examination. A man driven by greed may be free to pursue his desires, but that 鈥渂ase camp鈥� definition of freedom does not preclude enslavement to baser desires. Pundits or artists may freely peddle their sensational impulses, but if responsibility is missing, freedom is deformed. Freedom is nothing without right choices. If we are enslaved by a foreign tyrant or by our own self-destructive appetites, what is the difference?
There will always be a debate over how much government oversight is required. President Reagan famously declared that 鈥済overnment is the problem鈥� 鈥� another enemy. But nonintrusive government is earned 鈥� or lost 鈥� by an exact formula: 鈥�...when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have鈥� said Henry David Thoreau. Real freedom is a hard-won spiritual condition, not the law of the jungle.
Solutions are sought in theories, philosophies, systems of government, new programs, corrective legislation, and then more legislation correcting the corrections 鈥� anywhere but in the hearts of men, and anything but genuine self-government that preempts legislation.聽
There is no shortage of prominent figures designating enemies, always with one glaring omission. But as long as we鈥檙e making lists, we might want to take counsel of a bit of wisdom from Walt Kelly鈥檚 comic strip character, Pogo: 鈥淲e have met the enemy and he is us.鈥澛�
David Arzouman is an artist, composer, writer, and educator developing a new art school in Tokyo.
