« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Finance Capitalism in America

One thing we know about the last Great Depression is that it unleashed some of the most awful political ideas ever known to man. Economic dislocation and crisis often have that effect: provoking and liberating that which is most base and wicked in the politics of man. Here, for instance, we have a comment on the faithlessness set loose upon the world in the 1930s, from a great scientist of despair and treason whose penance for his own was his long perseverance in a cause he thought doomed, Whittaker Chambers:

When, in 1936, General Emilio Mola announced that he would capture Madrid because he had four columns outside the city and a fifth column of sympathizers within, the world pounced on the phrase with the eagerness of a man who has been groping for an important word. The world might better have been stunned as by a tocsin of calamity. For what Mola had done was to indicate the dimension of treason in our time.

Other ages have had their individual traitors — men who from faint-heartedness or hope of gain sold out their causes. But in the 20th century, for the first time, man banded together by millions, in movements like Fascism and Communism, dedicated to the purpose of betraying the institutions they lived under. In the 20th century, treason became a vocation whose modern form was specifically the treason of ideas.

The horror of treason is its sin against the spirit. And for him who violates this truth there rises inevitably Bukarin’s “absolutely black vacuity,” which is in reality a circle of absolute loneliness into which neither father, wife, child nor friend, however compassionate, can bring the grace of absolution. For this loneliness is a penalty inflicted by a justice that transcends the merely summary justice of men. It is the retributive meaning of treason because it is also one of the meanings of Hell.


So what shall be the “dimension of treason in our time,” now nearly three generations on from 1936?

I propose that we may learn much about that question by observing how our deeply the collapse of finance Capitalism coincides with a collapse of faith in America. In other words, we will be able to get a good sense for how deep the shock has struck by observing how many people, seeing finance Capitalism (usurious Capitalism, in my view) discredited, will imagine that America too is discredited. In bald terms, how many people have grown over the years to conflate Wall Street and America? How many think that what is good for Goldman Sachs is good for America? If a huge number of people bought into the illusion of an simple identity between (a) what America is and (b) what investment banking in late 20th century was, then we will have a huge number of patriots thrown into despair by the utter discredit of the object of their patriotism. If, on the other hand, very few Americans have fallen under the spell of this sirens’ song of globalized capital flowing without disruption around the world as the very essence of America, then we will be spared that horrible disillusionment of a patriotic ideal shattered.

It is my view that any conflation of finance Capitalism with America is a ruinous piece of reductionism at the expense of the latter. America is so much more than that. Even Capitalism itself is so much more than its most rarefied field of mathematical engineering. So whatever you do, whatever you may think of the current crisis, do not let the collapse of faith in finance Capitalism sow grave doubt where there once was faith in America. Do not hitch your cart of patriotism to the capricious mistress of investment banking.

COMMENTS

  • E Pluribus Unum

    In latter days, I think they constitute the 3rd and 4th columns, having unmasked themselves as uniformed soldiers of the left. So I believe now the 5th column consists of people who would attempt to shackle and hamstring the right from within itself.

  • Flagstaff

    Wjat seems to be happening is that both those with an ax to grind and those who are simply poorly informed are converting the symptom in the economy that resulted from over-borrowing (that symptom being the current financial “crisis”) into a condemnation of capitalism as inferior to soomething else, such as socialism. It’s not true, of course.

    Problems in part of a system no more define the success or failure of that system than does a given physical ailment doom an organism to failure, even a serious ailment. What can doom it, however, is for an external system with the power to do so to decide that the organism is fatally flawed and kill it before it can correct itself, or even just to interfere in its healing process to the extent that it can’t recover.

    Capitalism is a self-correcting system. Sometimes the process takes longer than other times, but it’s guaranteed to take longer the more that the Government insinuates itself into the process, unless what it does is to remove barriers to self-correction.

    • Paul Cella

      Capitalism is a self-correcting system.

      I think that proposition has been shaken by recent events. We at least need to add some qualifications. Capitalism is self-correcting assuming it doesn’t consume its own resources for correction. Or: Capitalism has some self-correcting elements, but these may on occasion be overwhelmed by its more reckless elements. Or: Capitalism, while generally self-correcting, has a tendency to degenerate into Plutocracy, which is indulgent and reckless.

      • Flagstaff

        The whole point of capitalism is that it’s market driven. If any one segment of the market drives itself to extinction there will be one of two results. Either it will remain extinct, which means it has reached its appropriate position, or it will be replaced by a better model which will provide the same, necessary, services, only in a more effective manner.

        I could, given the time and funding, produce an extensive argument that the whole problem we were facing last year was created not by the market, but by government interference in the market. The Readers’ Digest version is that the government created Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to artificially promote home ownership (and help the building trades unions and construction industry) by making it easier for people to buy a home they otherwise wouldn’t be able to afford. The move further and further into subprime mortgages was nothing conceptually new, it was just an extension of what they were doing before, but a lot more risky, and it wouldn’t have happened without more pressure (interference) from the Government. The subprime meltdown was not the result of bad business decisions, it was the result of bad political decisions.

  • http://www.braindeadrepublican.com Michael DeWeese

    The Dear Leader ZerO’s spending will come due. And it will be more than the families of America can pay. Not even taxing the richest 5% at 100% will pay for it. The option will be to nationalize business and assets all over America to pay the debt.

  • cannedjam

    Just to put things in perspective, if Obama had to spend the entire remaining national debt at the end of his first term, he would have to spend $100 a second every second for every minute in every hour, 24 hours a day 365 days a year for 3,975 years!

  • http://cannedjam.com cannedjam

    and that’s not taking into account leap year