From the Valley Patriot:
Circles can’t be squares and squares can’t be circles. For something to meet the requirements of both definitions is a logical impossibility. Just as square circles and circular squares don’t exist, I can assure you that crony capitalism doesn’t exist.
And if you knew and understood the meaning of the word capitalism you would immediately understand the logical impossibility of such a creature.
The term crony capitalism is a purposeful contradiction that seeks to undermine the meaning of capitalism while laying at capitalism’s doorstep the evils of socialism.
What image comes to mind when you hear the term crony capitalism? Do you picture excessively wealthy businessmen raking in gobs of additional, undeserved wealth because they have special political connections?
The emotional response that is provoked proceeds from a rational distaste for injustice: Why should these individuals benefit from special privileges when these same privileges are not available to me or to others? It makes you mad, and rightfully so!
After your initial anger dissipates, the concluding emotion is intended to be a visceral hatred for the wealthy and specifically for the wealthy businessmen who are the icons of capitalism.
The elixir that socialists want you to embrace is bigger and more powerful government. In simple terms you are supposed to conclude: The wealthy are evil. Capitalism is evil. Government is good. And government is the proper instrument for setting things right.
This is quite an accomplishment for a two-word lie.
So why is crony capitalism a logical impossibility … a square circle? Because the special, government-granted privileges that are at the core of this problem contradict the very essence of capitalism and would never exist under capitalism.
Ayn Rand defined capitalism as “… a social system based on the recognition of individual rights, including property rights, in which all property is privately owned.” She goes on to say, “The recognition of individual rights entails the banishment of physical force from human relationships: basically rights can be violated only by means of force. In a capitalist society, no man or group may initiate the use of physical force against others. The only function of government, in such a society, is the task of protecting man’s rights, i.e., the task of protecting him from physical force.”
Finally, Ayn Rand writes, “In a capitalist society, all human relationships are voluntary. Men are free to cooperate or not, as their individual judgments, convictions, and interests dictate. They can deal with one another only in terms of and by means of reason, i.e., by means of discussion, persuasion, and contractual agreement, by voluntary choice to mutual benefit.”
And later in the same paragraph, “It is the institution of private property that protects and implements the right to disagree – and thus keeps the road open to man’s most valuable attribute (valuable personally, socially, and objectively): the creative mind .”
How in a capitalist society are government-granted special privileges possible?
They are not.
In a capitalist society, individuals have the right to deal with others or not based on their own rational judgment. The government would have no power to transfer one individual’s wealth to another just because the other is connected. It would have no power to interfere with a private commercial transaction nor to dictate that any such transaction be concluded when both parties do not consent.
So how did the “crony capitalist” end up with his unearned wealth? Did the government hand him property expropriated from individuals via taxation? Did the government provide special monopoly power or restrict competition through licensing or tariffs? Did the government give special tax advantages or burden his competitors with onerous regulations?
If so, he is a thief and a beneficiary of socialism.GO READ THE WHOLE THING.
1 comment:
There is no such thing as "crony capitalism". There is only cronyism. This is because for every capitalist who asks or even hints that he would like to collude with government, there is a politician, an official or a bureaucrat who agrees to collude. Each gets what they want out of the deal. Government is a political animal and what the person on the government of the collusion gets is almost always political payback or advantage of some kind.
The sad truth is that the bigger the government is, the greater the number of opportunities to collude with someone in the private sector to gain or maintain political payment of some kind. This is yet one more reason why we must keep government as small as possible, and to resist its desire to grow big enough to consume us all.
-- theBuckWheat
Post a Comment