The Only Thing Worse Than Capitalism Is Everything Else

Moving 'past' capitalism means going backward.

By
176

Dear Reader (But perhaps not those of you tempted to do the Twitter equivalent of blackface humor to own the libs),

I really like the movie Good Will Hunting, despite the fact I hate it. I know that sounds weird, but I bet you have a bunch of movies like that. Well, not you over in the corner. But the rest of you. The American President is another movie I find compellingly watchable even though there’s so much of it I can’t stand.  

I just cut three paragraphs of ranting about The American President from this “news”letter. Suffice it to say, the movie is everything I can’t stand about Aaron Sorkin’s stuff. He really is a very gifted writer. But he is so sure of the rightness of his views, the stupidity and villainy of those he disagrees with, and so confident that he understands politics better than anyone else, that he ends up making borderline propaganda that’s all the more effective because he pretends that he’s offering the best arguments from conservatives. 

Good Will Hunting is annoying in similar ways. The main thrust of the movie is fine. It’s this one little subtheme that drives me nuts: Matt Damon’s character is a super genius, as demonstrated by his uncanny ability to solve complicated mathematical questions. That’s believable enough. Math prodigies are a thing. But we’re supposed to believe that his ability to instantaneously understand math (and organic chemistry) also applies to history and, to some extent, politics. So of course, he thinks Howard Zinn is the bomb (I am forgoing a 20-paragraph rant about Zinn). 

Keep reading with a free account
Create a free Dispatch account to keep reading Get Started ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
176
By
Comments (176)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Show Jay Janney the 🚪!

    Creative Destruction is a sometimes misunderstood concept, but it is always, long term, healthy for society. If we think of the economy in terms of investment, we try to put our resources to the most efficient use. Creative Destruction is when we (individually) choose to shift resources from lower value added use to higher value added use. Those employed in lower value added use are hurt, but long term society benefits.

    We struggle with what to do with those displaced by the shift. If we can re-engage them, there's a chance they'll prosper again.

    I grew up basically next to the family farm. Small farms are fun, but not profitable. The fact that one farmer can now feed hundreds of people is far better for society than the good old days when they could feed 50-60 people. Trust me when I say you don't want to have to depend on me to provide your food! :-)

    I'll close with a thought on investment. Carl Icahn just lost over $1 billion betting that financial engineering at Hertz was more efficient than upgrading the Hertz experience. Sometimes the bankers lose, and lose ugly....

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    Khal Spencer

    As you say, Jonah. Its hard to sing the virtues of capitalism when your factory just shipped all the jobs to China and all the money ended up with the investment bankers. Ultimately, I trust that we will find other ways for those workers to make a buck here at home and I have a little faith left that the system can self-correct, but meanwhile, as the saying goes, when you are up to your ass in alligators...

    Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Susan Johnston

    I don't disagree with the your argument about arbitrariness but I do think that your own knee jerk responses to anything that seems even a little left of center has skewed your reaction to the scene you describe between Will and Skylar. His comparison to eating caramels as a roughly equivalent experience to drinking coffee comes off as a non sequitur and he has to explain the comparison in a somewhat cringe worthy moment. She seems to get it but it is clearly more indicative of another common phenomenon. Will was anxious about his overture and somewhat surprised that she has responded so he is attempting, rather lamely, to exhibit the charm that seemed to work and in the process revealing his insecurity.

    It is much more suggestive of adolescent self-consciousness than any legitimate comparison between eating caramels and drinking coffee. It tells us Will may be quite bright intellectually but his emotional range is still firmly ensconced in teen angst.

    Also, people stop at red lights not solely due to law enforcement but because they know the cross traffic may, indeed, take the green signal seriously and come through for the T-bone. We have set that expectation and should be willing to live with the outcomes until a better way evolves. Like roundabouts maybe?

    I believe the issues you associate with arbitrariness are actually social norms which evolve based on expectations and values ascribed to the society in which they emerge. Capitalism is as disruptive as we allow it to be, legally and economically. There are forces which control the marketplace that will hold disruption at bay if they are unable to adapt quickly enough to 'capitalize.'

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    John D. Wright

    So Jonah! Great one. I wanted to say that I am interested in your writing process and how you honed your skill. So an occasionally dive into that subject is interesting to me. Thanks.

    Collapse
  5. IHF

    A difficulty with Mr. Goldberg's argument is that it is very hard to provide any solid basis for evaluating the statement that "The disruptive nature of capitalism—'creative destruction' if you prefer Schumpeter’s phrase—is a net benefit over time."

    How does one even begin to weigh the costs and benefits of any particular social disruption? What would we use as our measure of benefit, and how would we assign our units? How, in the end, would we even know what to count as having been destroyed?

    If the creative destruction of capitalism leads to "Bowling Alone", have we lost anything of value? How would we know? Even if we decide that we have, how would we then decide what number of cheap running shoes, summer shorts, iPhones, eyeglasses, and antibiotics it would take to get us to a net benefit?

    Moreover, even if we accept Hans Rosling's general thesis as sound, how could we know what part of all that good news is due to capitalism and what part is due to the forces that pushed against capitalism's undirected tides and shaped their flow into channels dug by values from other areas of human aspiration? Can capitalism tell us which "[c]lear, simple, and just rules help the little guy"—or do we need to look somewhere else for that?

    In the video, the nails in that bucket became ordered because energy was injected into the system. Work creates order. By contrast, as Messrs. Goldberg and Schumpeter agree, capitalism destroys order.

    In the end, "creative destruction" is a clever turn of phrase hiding a deeply pernicious error. It is entirely true that destruction often proceeds creation. Why, even Lenin and Trotsky would cheerfully sign on to that proposition; it lay at the heart of their life's work. But one should never confuse the creation of entropy with the creation of human relations, structures, or values. Those are creations of a different order—even if the process that creates them must sometimes take destruction as its starting point—and capitalism plays no part in that creativity except perhaps, incidentally, as a kind of random values generator.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      John D. Wright

      I don't want to speak for Jonah but here is my take on what he means by Creative Destruction.

      In a competitive market economy superior businesses are putting inferior businesses out all the time. That is the creative destruction of which he speaks. They fail because some other business has found a better way to operate or a better way to fill the needs of their customers. So over time things keep getting better.

      Now if the shoe factory producing the inferior product is the only factory in town, then for that town it is a bad thing. For the nation it would be terrible though if we just settled for inferior shoes forever to save that factory. That doesn't make it easy for the people of that town. Nation vs Town though and I think you have to side with the nation.

      Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Show Jay Janney the 🚪!

    I just left twitter, saw a boatload of attacks on Jonah...Sad, because that's our job! (just kidding). I thought they were unfair.

    The attacks made me sad. Many years ago I enjoyed reading Michelle Malkin about half the time. Some of her work was excellent (some was just clickbait). It's sad to see her pander to the market niche she's trying to attack.

    It's sad to see Trump turn on Jeff Sessions. 'Bama's not my state so I don't have a dog in that fight. I fault no one for preferring one over the other, both have good qualities to them. But I always felt Sessions had character. Maybe he conned me, but I felt as if he supported Trump because he thought Trump would be better for America than Hillary Clinton would have been. I felt he rightly recused himself. But to have Trump turn on him seems cruel, bitter, and vengeful. In a way, I hope Sessions wins, even though I don't have a dog in that fight, because it gives Trump some comeuppance for his disloyalty.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      John D. Wright

      I have mixed feelings about Sessions but he was with Trump from the beginning. He played a big part in getting Trump through the primaries. It's a bit of schadenfreude to see him suffering in this situation. I am though also repulsed by Trump's lack of loyalty and I am at least a little inspired that Sessions stuck by his guns on his recusal. So I guess I can draw solace whoever loses. I probably lean Sessions though.

      Collapse
  7. Sean Patrick Devlin

    Argo is that movie for me. Those monologues from the Iranians denouncing America and completely revising Iranian history are galling as they’re probably Affleck’s views. Still I watch it whenever it’s on.

    Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    Terrence

    Well done! Similarly, to continue down the footpath into popular culture, selfishness is not always selfish. Another maddeningly talented film maker, and writer, who makes entertaining movies in spite of his savage disdain for historical truth, wrote: “The point is, ladies and gentleman, that greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right, greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms; greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge has marked the upward surge of mankind.”

    Although the nidus of this speech has defined, incorrectly, an entire decade, I am sure even Sen. Warren would nod in agreement if the exact words were delivered by Martin Sheen’s character in his greasy overalls.

    Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    Angie

    That video was really cool, it would have never occurred to me you could even do that.

    Collapse
  10. Luke Thompson

    One of the most important features we need is to ignore other commenters. Especially so long as we don't have control over when we get emails when they comment on our posts. Pat Riot is an obvious example, since that's the same name as a troll on NRO who appears to have followed you here.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      JohnF

      Near as I can tell, the definition of a "Troll" over at NRO is: "Anyone who disagrees with anything that Donald Trump has ever said or done throughout his life." Extra points are given to those who repeat pro-Trump conspiracy theories and treat the ramblings of Hannity and Limbaugh as if they were the definitive truth. Anyone who departs from that path is subject to a great deal of abuse, ridicule, and vitriol. As a result, over the past year, the comments section at NRO has become a cesspool.
      I've read Pat's comments in that forum and this one. Overall, I would say that his comments here are generally more constructive and interesting. I attribute that to this forum's tendency to be more respectful of diverse opinions and tolerant of other commenters. NRO used to be more like that. It now serves as a cautionary example of what can happen when a forum is overwhelmed by intolerance.
      Overall, I think we're all better off if we focus on critiquing and discussing the comment and not the commenter.

      Collapse
      1. Luke Thompson

        Pat Riot is a troll. After all, someone with literally no conservative impulses would have no motivation to subscribe to either site. Few comments are actually motivating or inspire comments. And if you think that NRO supports Trump, even on average, you've not spent much time there. We are, after all, talking about the magazine that published an issue titled "Against Trump."

        His comments are never constructive. They're rarely true, for that matter. They're designed to create controversy and argument. (As evidenced by the fact that the only "Fact Check" he's objected to out of the last six is the one that was obviously correct, just not worded strongly enough.")

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          John D. Wright

          So you think the other fact checks were likely wrong or possibly wrong?

          Collapse
      2. Avatar photo
        Pat Riot

        I am most certainly dragged into the comments section sewer at NR and I guess that's on me. My subscription there is expiring soon and I don't comment there that often anymore. It's mostly a waste of time.

        They seem to be making an attempt to actually moderate their comments, but I have my doubts since at least half of the commenters there don't seem to be able to make an argument in any way besides a personal attack--and Trump's sole methodology *is* a personal attack, so the crap rolls down hill as it were. Hence if they moderate their comments they are likely to see a mass cancelation, and will probably be forced to stop.

        Or, perhaps as I predicted, NR will be bought by Brietbart and that will be that...

        Collapse
Load More