TIN TỨC

fanpage

Thống kê truy cập

  • Online: 14
  • Hôm nay: 343
  • Tháng: 10792
  • Tổng truy cập: 5144111
Chi tiết bài viết

Free Market Fantasies: Capitalism in the Real World

BY PATRICK JONES 

The Soviet challenge is gone. Socialism has been discredited by tyranny. The economy has expanded for an entire decade. Stock values continue to exceed all rational expectations. Unemployment is at record lows. Consumer confidence remains high. Production is humming. Americans are awash in new products, gadgets and goods. And everywhere you look, free market ideology reigns with the swagger and arrogance of an undisputed champ.

But, wait! We have a challenger. On Free Market Fantasies: Capitalism in the Real World, noted MIT linguist and political dissident, Noam Chomsky, steps into the ring to personally debunk the myth of the free market by pulling back the curtain on the Wizards of Dollars in American society. He puts forth a powerful one-man rebuttal to what he calls the “cult of the free market.” For a scrawny, bespectacled, old scholar, the result packs a devastating wallop.

Image result

According to Chomsky, the chasm between “free market fantasies” and “really existing free market theory,” that is the one that is actually applied and not talked about, is acute and growing. The dominant political rhetoric of our time states that the poor and working-class must learn responsibility and be subjected to market discipline which is good for building character through tough love. The state should not intervene to help out these folks when they struggling or fail. Conversely, most wealthy individuals and corporations demand a “nanny state” to protect them from market discipline so that they can rant and rave about the marvels of the free market while getting properly subsidized by others through the state. Despite the rhetoric of laissez-faire and free competition, these same wealthy interests demand state aid to minimize competitive risk and help maximize profits. So, if anything goes wrong, the state, through tax dollars, intervenes to bail out the corporation or wealthy individual. In fact, according to Fortune magazine, every single one of the top 100 leading transnational corporations benefited from state intervention on their behalf. Twenty of that 100 were saved from total disaster, meaning collapse, by state bailout. In effect, then, free market ideology is founded on a class-based double-standard.

Amid all the details and statistics that Chomsky presents to back up his views, though, there is a simple, but profound, point at the heart of the argument: There is no such thing as a “free market.” Never has been. Never will be. In fact, the government has always interceded in the economy, most consistently on the side of large corporations against the interests of the majority of American citizens. The important question, then, is not whether or not the government should intercede in the economy, but, rather, on whose behalf they should act and toward what end. Chomsky makes clear that “free markets” are intended only for the poor.

In the end, it is hard to argue with Chomskys compelling evidence. Free Market Fantasies provides a necessary tonic to the triumphalist back-slapping of the global economys Captains of Industry. It reminds us that there is nothing magical or mystical about the market and that it is not a panacea for all of the ills facing the United States. Free Market Fantasies is heady stuff, for sure; a little like medicine. It might not always go down smoothly, but it is definitely good for you.

Few people have made an impact on the world like renowned linguist, Noam Chomsky. Chomsky revolutionized the field of linguistics with his cognitive theory that language was an innate faculty genetically defined in the human brain. The M.I.T professor holds the title of being the most cited living person, and is sometimes said to be to linguistics what Einstein was to Physics. However, linguistics aside, Chomskys intellectual contribution is extensive. He “has published over seventy books and over a thousand articles in the fields of linguistics, philosophy, history, politics, cognitive sciences and psychology” (Rudolph).

Chomsky, a libertarian socialist, has attained cult-figure status in the political arena with his outspoken political activism, and biting criticism of the U.S. capitalist machine. His basic argument is that true capitalism does not exist in reality. According to him, capitalism in the United States is a façade intentionally created by the power structure in order to subjugate the masses, in the interest of the rich and powerful. He applies this view to issues such as U.S. foreign policy, traditional politics, and the role of media to reveal that hidden under layers of propaganda and political rhetoric are intentions that benefit the rich by manipulating the poor, working class.

 

In a 1994 article entitled How free is the Free Market, Chomsky states, “the free market is socialism for the rich: the public pays the costs and the rich get the benefit --markets for the poor and plenty of state protection for the rich.” His meaning is that the market claims to be free in order to gain the trust and tax funds of the working class, but in actuality, control of the market is enormously swayed in favor of the rich and privileged. Power is concentrated into unaccountable institutions that are highly subsidized and protected by the government in the interest of the rich elite.

Chomsky begins by demonstrating his theory through a human rights perspective. Human rights are frequently an issue brought up by the U.S. when legitimizing its reasons for foreign intervention in backwards, third world countries. The1948 UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states the universal right of everyone to a standard of living adequate for himself and his family, if often used as a leverage to support U.S. foreign opinion. However, Chomsky questions, “How are these principles upheld in the richest country in the world, with absolutely unparalleled advantages and no excuses for not completely satisfying them?” He states that in New York City, 40% of children live below the poverty line. In fact, according to Chomsky, the U.S. has the worst poverty record in the industrialized world--twice as high as Englands.

 

Trade in the U.S. is another excellent example for the argument against the supposedly free market. Chomsky questions the true efficiency of trade. He argues that in practice, trade is “highly subsidized with huge market-distorting factors” that are not accounted for. Chomsky provides transportation as an example of a market-distorting factor. He writes, “Since trade naturally requires transport, the costs of transport enter into the calculation of the efficiency of trade.” He explains that since all forms of transportation are highly subsidized through energy-cost manipulation or other methods, the true costs of transport are greatly reduced.

Additionally, Chomsky describes how trade is indirectly subsidized. A substantial part of the Pentagon is directed towards maintaining intervention forces in the Middle East. Chomsky argues that the reason behind U.S. interest is primarily “to keep oil prices within a certain range.” U.S. and British Oil companies do not want oil prices to drop too low, because that would mean a loss of profit. At the same time, oil prices that are too high would mean an inefficiency of trade. The result is that the profit motive of these corporations has a negative effect on the efficiency of trade. Chomskys broad argument is that the power structure of rich corporations has such a large influence on government and the economy that there is no real market freedom. The consumer, being unaware, continues to suffer at the hands of corporations.

 

Further proof of how much corporations gain from U.S. economic policy comes from the acknowledgement that a huge percentage of trade accounted for in GDP as foreign exports isnt even real trade. More than half of Mexican exports never even enter the Mexican market and it is estimated that about 40% of world trade is internal to corporations. Although classified as exports, a lot of trade consists of internal transactions within corporations from one plant to another across national borders. The true reasons for this type of “trade” are cheaper labor costs, and less pressure on corporations to curb pollution. Chomsky describes the system as a corporate mercantilism, “centrally-managed transactions run by a very visible hand with major market distortions of all kinds.”

Chomsky uses the example of trade and its inefficiencies to point out that “efficiency is largely an ideological construction.” In other words, U.S. policies dont really depend on economic efficiency; what matters are the power relations. Chomsky says, “there have been a number of academic and management-affirmed studies which have shown over and over that automation is introduced by managers, even when it increases costs - when its inefficient - just for power reasons.” To strengthen his position, Chomsky provides examples. In the 1950s, before they were marketable, computers were almost 100% taxpayer supported. In the 1980s, the state supported around 85% of all electronics. And biotechnology and pharmaceuticals “were all initiated and maintained by enormous state subsidies and intervention - otherwise they would not exist” (Chomsky). But when these innovations became market-worthy, production was handed over to private corporations to milk the profits. Chomsky exclaims, “Its called free enterprise!”

 

Chomsky also analyzes U.S. capitalism from a global perspective. When The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was implemented in 1984, it pushed for acceleration from a national economy to a global economy. Chomsky claims that its effect meant greater mobility of capital, leading to greater immobility of labor. NAFTA made it easier for American corporations to switch their labor force to less developed countries, with cheaper labor costs, and less environmental regulation. Chomsky agrees that the effects of NAFTA were lowered wage rates of unskilled workers in the U.S. He states that unskilled workers make up 70% to 75% of the work force. The workers lose because of trade agreements such as NAFTA, which are agreed on and implemented by corporations for their own benefit.

The issue has global connotations. He claims that the influence of transnational enterprises on parliamentary institutions is growing larger. The end of the Cold War saw the movement of U.S. corporations into Eastern Europe. “When General Motors set up a plant in Poland they insisted upon high tariff protection; similarly, when Volkswagen sets up a plant in the Czech Republic it insists on tariff protection and also externalization of costs.” The people of these countries cover the costs, while the American corporations hoard all the profits. In Poland for example, because of capitalist reforms, the people who are fairly educated, will work for 10% of the U.S. wage rate with no benefits. In Chomskys words, “markets for the poor and plenty of state protection for the rich.”

 

Trade compromises such as NAFTA and The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) only assist in perpetuating the disparity. Chomsky describes them as complicated mixtures of “liberalization and protectionism carefully crafted in the interest of the transnational corporations”. An example of this is GATTs guarantee of intellectual property rights. Chomsky claims that it prevents technical innovation and reduces economic efficiency. He argues that the protection of intellectual property is only in place to guarantee “that the technology of the future is monopolized by huge and generally government-subsidized private corporations.” GATTs inclusion of product patents prevents someone who designs a better technique to produce a drug to implement that technique. This has great effects on poorer countries such as India, where traditionally, big corporations where able to produce essential drugs at much cheaper costs. Product patents ensure that Indias pharmaceutical sector will no longer be able to design more efficient methods of producing drugs.

And even high-ranking government officials have admitted that the market is less free than purportedly claimed. When GNP reached record heights in the first years of the Reagan administration, they boasted to the public that it was because of the free market. However, to the business community, they provided a different explanation. James Baker, Secretary of the Treasury, announced at a business convention “that the Reagan administration offered more protection to U.S. manufacturers than any of the preceding post-war administrations” (Chomsky). But he wasnt entirely truthful. According to Chomsky, the administration offered more protection than all other administrations combined.

 

Chomsky cites the aeronautical industry as an example of just how much big businesses are subsidized by State funds. Fortune magazine explains how the industry could never survive in the market without public support. Companies such as Boeing are almost completely subsidized. The industry is largely supported and subsidized by NASA and the Pentagon. In practice, corporations run the free market. “The profits are privatized and thats what counts,” claims Chomsky.

While well known for his fiery criticism of the free market and capitalism, Chomsky avoids imposing a replacement for the system he so publicly denounces because he acknowledges the complexities of understanding social behavior. According to a Z magazine article entitled Noam Chomsky on Anarchism, “he cautions that it is difficult to predict what particular forms a more just social organization will take, or even to know for sure what alternatives to the current system are ideal” (Lane)

However, Chomsky maintains a vague idea of an ideal alternative. He actively supports the libertarian socialist cause. The website, flag.blackened.net, defines libertarian socialism as “an anti-authoritarian form of socialism and the main principles are liberty, freedom, the right for workers to fraternize and organize democratically, the absence of illegitimate authority and the resistance against force.” Libertarian Socialism is a kind of anarchism, which believes in a system “without state or capitalist masters” (flag.blackened.net). The exception is that libertarian socialism emphasizes individual liberty; without State regulation and limitations, working class individuals will be able to organize together through information and education in order to make the best judgments for themselves.

Các bài viết khác

Luật sư tư vấn miễn phí

Gọi ngay
0902818158- 0906834543
0906834543
0902818158

Tin pháp luật

CÁC ĐỐI TÁC

  • Nhà Đất Phúc An Khang
  • The Diplomat
  • The NewYork Review of Book
  • CogitAsia
  • Reuters
  • Viet Studies
  • The NewYork Times
  • TIME
  • Bloomberg Bussiness