I’ve noticed that political party lines are becoming increasingly blurred these days, and not just in Canada. Are we getting to the point where we don’t have many real choices any more, or is that just the way it’s always been?
Under socialism, government owns the means of production, which the U.S. government increasingly wants to do. In June, through $750 million in investments, it took minority equity stakes in two semiconductor companies. In July, through up to $874 million in additional funding, it took minority equity stakes in six more and increased its ownership of a seventh. The Cato Institute counts 30 companies in the federal government’s expanded corporate portfolio. “Republicans warning that communists are taking over the Democratic Party might first ask why their own administration is so eager to have the government acquire pieces of private companies,” Cato analyst Tad DeHaven suggested.
Fascism has usurped free market capitalism as other than what is explicitly owned by the state (socialism) virtually everything not owned by the state is also under the regulatory and tax authority of the state. Free market “capitalism” (given that Marx invented the term “capitalism”, liberty is a better word) only now increasingly exists in the underground economy. From the CCP’s “state capitalism” to the bankrupt welfare states of the west and virtually everything in between, Fascism is dominant but all states enjoy some level of socialism. In Canada, aside from the obvious health care and education sectors (much like in the US), there’s the feudal land ownership of 89% (increasingly being considered as under “title” of the 100% communism of the indigenous parasite sector) compared to the roughly 40% of public land in the US.
Much like communism, free market capitalism has never worked — but there’s always someone willing to stake people’s lives on trying it again. This time for sure!
When you really think about it, both of them share the same Materialist roots.
Probably the reason why Ayn Rand was such a fan. Yes, I said what I said; no, I’m not taking it back.
PS. No, Adam Smith didn’t create free market capitalism; if you read ‘Wealth of Nations’ and compare it to ‘free market capitalism’ there’s not overwhelming congruence. One can justly critique Adam Smith, but let’s not tar him with that brush; he was an adept and nuanced thinker.
Free market capitalism has actually never been tried because governments, even the best of them, always got in the way.
And most, over time, increasingly f*cked things up.
Here’s an early example from early “capitalist” USA:
George Washington signed the Whiskey Tax into law in 1791 at the urging of Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton to help pay off national debts from the American Revolutionary War. The tax imposed an excise duty on distilled spirits, which disproportionately burdened small-scale farmers in the Western frontier who relied on whiskey as a medium of exchange and lacked ready cash.
Resistance to the tax escalated into the Whiskey Rebellion in 1794, where farmers in Western Pennsylvania violently attacked tax collectors and officials. To assert federal authority, Washington personally led a militia force of approximately 13,000 troops to suppress the uprising, which dispersed without major combat.
Oh, my grandad, he made whiskey, his grandad made it too, ain’t none of us paid no whiskey tax since 1792…
https://youtu.be/BhavzsdylbM?si=oM6MYcZ64QFnpqfp
That’s beautiful! Thank you for saying that!
“Communism has actually never been tried because governments/people, even the best of them, always got in the way.”
Read what I said about Adam Smith and his “Wealth of Nations” and read Adam Smith’s “Wealth of Nations” — ‘free market capitalism’ wasn’t created by him and is a modernist construct grounded in Materialism (the modern version, the ancient Greeks were only talking about the natural world, not economics) and the leading figures are….Marx and Engels.
*Adam Smith does however mention that free market access/trading can only be achieved by a just and moral people; in this he at least understands the limitations of his theory — a better thinker than Karl and Freiderich.
Except communism is government control in all aspects of an economy, which becomes control of all aspects of a person’s life.
Capitalism is the exact opposite, and, yes, it has never existed, except where and when the government couldn’t extend its reach, for example in early frontier areas.
Also, nice try avoiding the Whisky Rebellion comment I added to my initial one.
One more thing, everyone hanging around this neighborhood knows Communism had been the system in many places around the world. So stuff you’re equivalence with me saying “capitalism has never having been tried”.
Both are at their roots, founded in the materialist dialectic. Both rely on a vision of a human elite (communism — the party; ‘free market capitalism’ — captains of finance/industry…both are essentially a ruling body of all wise oligarchs) to run the affairs of humans for their own good…of course both don’t believe in anything outside of objective reality, so no religion, culture, ethics, morals or whatever (see what I said about Adam Smith and why he shouldn’t be tarred with this brush).
I didn’t see your Whiskey Rebellion comment, but I will endeavor to not avoid it:
Oh no! Heavens forfend that George Washington tried to alleviate our war debts and stabilize our economy so the country managed to survive! (and it taxed imported alcohol as well, so it wasn’t just the rural folks that had to deal with it, that part often gets left out of discussion). And…and…it taxed something that while enjoyable by many, isn’t a vital necessity. You can always make something else besides whiskey with grain.
And “around this neighborhood”? “Stuff[it]”? Really? My goodness, that seems a bit…hostile.
I’m truly so very sorry if I’ve burst the ‘folks from around these here parts’ little bubbles, but I did provide some hints at reading material to back up my claims (may I also suggest a quick re-read of “Atlas Shrugged” and “The Fountainhead”, alongside Libertarian writings, and “Materialism and Empirio-Criticism” by one VI Lenin?).
Just because it uses two different words and claims to be opposites, doesn’t mean it is. I’m sorry you’ve been psy-op’d.
One is founded on individual freedom (no elite ruling body), the other is founded on servitude to the state.
The former doesn’t rely on a vision of a human elite (I have no idea where you get that stupid notion from—talk about being psy-op’d). But the latter does.
Business, industry, finance aren’t the defining characteristic of capitalism, but the results thereof and can be abused or not, perverted or no, but that doesn’t negate the virtue of capitalism.
“You can always make something else besides whiskey with grain.”
Ah but bread is much lower energy density and doesn’t keep the way whiskey does. Blood sugar.
Our country and yours, U Jane, were built on pork and whiskey, or you don’t know your history.
Hamiliton’s ‘Report on Manufactures’, Pope LeoXIII’s ‘Rerum Novarum’, probably should read that as well. And maybe look into the occupations of Revolutionary to Civil War era Americans — contrary to what many believe, it wasn’t some bucolic Jeffersonian wilderness, even at the time of the Revolution, romantic as that may sound. I try my best to read history books.
Especially Oz.
Free market capitalism has actually never been tried because governments, even the best of them, always got in the way.
This. In spades. As soon as the bastards stick a toe into the water, it is no longer a free market.
Oh, I don’t know; free market capitalism seems to be fairly well developed in Singapore — highest rating of economic freedom in the world! Wonderful place for a person starting out in a low wage job to make it up the social ladder, what with being so free market, tres not authoritarian at all either.
“The sale, importation, and manufacture of chewing gum have been illegal in Singapore since 1992.”
“Public behavior is heavily regulated; smoking in public areas, littering, jaywalking, and spitting attract heavy fines.”
Vaping and e-cigarettes are completely illegal to import, possess, or use, with fines starting at $700 SGD and potential deportation for repeat offenders.”
Tres not authoritarian at all, says she.
One more thing Jane, it’s well past midnight where I live so I’m going to forgo furhter comment.
Cheers
On the contrary, the rise of large multi-nationals is at its essence ‘free market capitalism’ (you wonder why I put this in scare quotes, because it deserves it — see: Adam Smith mentions), so too is the rise of large global banking concerns.
And how much freedom, innovation, spreading of the wealth/raising of all boats has come out of it?
We could then touch a bit on why the kids aren’t all right and how we’re now facing an onslaught of communist-y badness.
Asking both of our respective countries’ manufacturing workers how those free trade agreements have worked out for them — how were those things sold to people again?
And let us remember that this “free market capitalism” as we perceive it is the brainchild of Hayek (who was buddies with Keynes, kept up quite the correspondence, funny that) and the Chicago School (aka. the same Neoliberalism that welcomed members of the Frankfurt School). They’ve always been very cozy, don’t shoot the messenger.
“…the rise of large multi-nationals is at its essence ‘free market capitalism’…”
I think you’ll find that the large multinationals are the product of the British, German and French empires. They can’t exist without favorable terms dictated by government. There’s nothing “free market” about them.
Maybe try the histories of the big European and American oil companies. There’s plenty of socialism and government activity baked in, starting all the way back in Pennsylvania in the 1860s. Nothing free-market about it. Or you can research telecoms, computer companies, trains…
The CATO Institute is a ‘free trade’, libertarian organization. Their ‘free trade’ policies, immigration policies (they want more of it), and drug policy (they’re for ‘harm reduction’) have worked how well?
Having the federal government supporting key industries involved in national security isn’t the totalitarian state overreach that they like to scream about — like encouraging a domestic drone component industry so we don’t have to rely on those Chinese ones (that the admirable folks at CATO have had no issue with because ‘free trade’).
Tad must be a tad stupid, if he can’t figure out why the USA is taking a stake in semi conductor and exotic metal corps. The war in europe is a prime example, people using trade barriers for war manipulation and all that.
Geopolitical and economic GYMmy…stupid and all that.
No problem with gov’t supporting essential private enterprises in a minority shareholder status. Key words are minority and essential. Rare earths, fossil fuels, nuclear energy, power networks, tech production like semiconductors and aerospace are all good investments that will pay back over time. Gov’t positions can also be sold off for profit.
Gov’t cannot build or operate anything properly.
Wind farms, battery production, carbon capture and such DEI/climatescam BS are not. No rate of return or future unloading positions.
Beware and learn from Canada’s Petro-Canada and gold investment disasters.
A good essay. Suffice to say that there are varying degrees of control on the production of virtually everything. And there can be compelling reasons why serious control – up to and including acquisition – is preferable or required. There are certainly potential dangers, but they are kept in check by a diligent and brave opposition, an honest and curious press, and an informed and serious electorate.
Feel better?
The opposition is determined to undo this administration. The press are the opposition’s willing lackeys and fellow travelers. And the electorate has been psyop’d into either being avid fans of either Team Blue (communism) or Team Red (‘free markets!TM’) which are just the two pieces of bread to the same shit sandwich, prepared oh so lovingly by the same folks that gave us ‘international rules based order’ GWOTs, the likes of Dr. Fauci & Associates, and the 2008 banking crisis.
If I was an avid supporter of either Team, I’d probably feel a bit of encouragement.
As it stands (and while acknowledging the potential problems, no system is perfect) I can only hope and pray that both Team Red and Team Blue get their backsides handed to them — they’ve done quite enough damage as it is.
My friend, we’ve had a Uniparty state in Canada and most of the western world for over 2 decades now. Voting for a ‘conservative’ party just means they arrive at the same place slightly slower than voting for a ‘progressive’ party. There really isn’t much difference once ‘conservatives’ get into power. Zero conservative parties have rolled back any progressive laws in any western nation in any meaningful fashion.
The only meaningful one I can think of is Harper abolishing the CWB.
They’re just as bad Grits and Dips
“Voting for a ‘conservative’ party just means they arrive at the same place slightly slower”
I always saw the conservatives as the “caretaker” party.
They came in and cleaned up the obvious sloven.
They picked up the trash, swept the floors, washed the dishes.
Did the grocery shopping and walked the dog.
Then turned the house back over to the Liberals to be trashed.
Myself and others have been screaming about cuckservatives since before Harper was PM I think, so yes we have a UniParty, you’re just a little late to the game noticing them I suppose.
My only problem with Trump, even before he became president the first time was that he was never a legitimate conservative/ right winger
Considering that the ‘conservative/right-wingers’ got us a 20 year war to nowhere, a couple of financial crisis, a lowering of living standards, a gutted industrial plant, lowering standards of education…et al., this may be a point in his favor.
One thing Killer was correct about: no, my President doesn’t give a damn about the Republican Party, any more than the Democrat or Libertarian Parties. Good for him, and good for the people who finally got sick and tired of the Uniparty (of which the CATO Institute was a well respected part).
Perhaps Canadians should take notes.
“Perhaps Canadians should take notes.”
We don’t have a place on our ballot to “write in” the name of the guy we want to be Prime Minister.
Your President appoints friends and family as his cabinet; our cabinet is chosen from elected officials.
Put bluntly, we can’t change the whole executive government and its policies by just shooting one guy through the head as happened in your country in ’63.
In Canada, with appointed-for-life Senators and a Sovereign sitting on a foreign throne as Head of State, parties are a baked-in-the-cake permanent reality.
Are we getting to the point where we don’t have many real choices any more
Last three federal elections I have truly had no one to vote for. And the two or 3 prior to that I held my nose…
Albertans are getting a chance at a real choice this October.
Cato has an agenda and is either ignorant of or, more likely I think, unwilling to accept what trump et al are doing – they are replacing the govt grants/loans= free money business model with one in which they hold the recipient’s equity base hostage to good performance on whatever criteria the loan/grant is for. Billion dollar “investments” in absurd, but ideologically aligned, business plans like Obama’s and Trudeau’s are not in the Trump/bessent playbook.
Note, in this context, that all of these for which the contracts are public or semipublic have sunset provisions.
“Cato has an agenda and is either ignorant of or, more likely I think, unwilling to accept what trump et al are doing…”
Yes, absolutely. This agenda is called “Never Trump!!!” and I deeply suspect the reasons for it can be found among the grift uncovered by DOGE. It’s a bit much to believe that ALL the corruption was DemocRat in origin.
Heh.
We live in an endstage Kleptocracy.
Does not matter who we vote for,they are still going to be a kleptocrat.
When thieves and bandits make the laws,those laws are going to exclude any victims from ever achieving power.
Our political class are the reason we cannot have nice things.
And as we refuse to produce any further wealth,they are starting to fight amongst themselves..
Funny how a country fails.
Takers produce nothing.
Increasing the parasitic overload,only accelerates our decline.
So what does our leadership do?
Hire more minions and import more “doctors and whatever they were supposed to be’s”
Anyone who argues that the Biden administration’s approach of simply giving billions of dollars to semiconductor companies, with no possible return to the taxpayers was superior, is out of their mind.
“In June, through $750 million in investments, it took minority equity stakes in two semiconductor companies.”
The essay ignores the unfortunate fact that A) the modern world literally runs on semiconductor chips and B) ALL the semiconductor chips of consequence are made by TSMC in Taiwan.
And Taiwan is an island in the Pacific, currently under threat of a hearty conquering by the Chicoms.
There is the related issue that the USA and Europe are in a trade war with China. China dumps finished goods in the West -far- cheaper than we can make them ourselves. They’ve been doing it for 30+ years, so long that manufacturing has essentially left Europe and N. America completely.
You can’t have that. It’s madness. But here we are.
So the #Trump administration has A) put up tariffs to allow AMERICAN companies to compete with China and B) to bring manufacturing back to the USA, because there’s going to be a war. For sure. Europe is in fact already at war, and the USA is already fighting a proxy war with China in Iran. (Yes, that’s what that is.)
If the USA is getting all it’s essential materials and finished goods from Asia, and all it’s tech from an island in the Pacific off the coast of Chicomland, the USA is going to lose. It might already be too late. But on the bright side the Chicoms suck at everything, so there might still be a chance.