Have Socialism and Communism Failed in a World that is 100% Capitalist? Or Have the Revolutionaries Failed to Translate Marx’s and Allied Thinkers Ideas?
The most important thing that each of us must remember is that there is a lot of misinformation and propaganda about what socialism and communism are. There are many authors involved in relation to socialist and communist ideas although Marx always seems to be the epicenter of these ideas as far as public opinion is concerned. Much of the misinformation comes from the harmful means of mass communication as they reach every corner of the planet. Before exploring these two ideas, socialism and communism, we must first clarify many concepts since most people do not know or do not understand what these ideas really are or their true meaning. Usually we see a newspaper figure, the talking heads on the television tube, the busty female reporter of the night news who does not have the faintest idea of what socialism or communism are and who comes to tell us a story which falsely tells us how socialism and communism have been a supposed absolute failure followed by some dumb free market delusion which reminds us how beautiful the infinite shortage ability for the working class to acquire such goods and services is in a world of capitalist hierarchical world full of abundance. Let us first clearly conceptualize what each thing is, and we will call a spade a spade when in the presence of one. So we will get a clear idea of these two socio-economic movements that have been so controversial. One thing must be clear from now on; the capitalist hierarchy will not allow any other socioeconomic system on the planet to exist so as long as capitalism exists. Since capitalism is the only system that has been practiced on the planet for the last two centuries and beyond, this makes this challenge quite large: How to move from a world of extreme scarcity and capitalist hierarchical despotism into a world of abundance of resources or a world of government of direct and horizontal democracy and at the same time post capitalist?
When Marx Contributed Writing the Communist Manifesto What Was Occurring in the West?
We must remember that much of the period of light or enlightenment had already developed in Europe when Marx began his work around 1860. We must also remember that Rousseau’s Social Contract had already affected the constitution of many countries including United States of North America. Pierre-Joseph Proudhon had left his legacy with anarchist ideas focused on socialism just before Marx appeared on the world stage. Marx was of German Prussian origin and had to immigrate to Great Britain because his revolutionary ideas were not tolerated in his place of origin. Most of Marx’s ideas developed because his colleague Frederick Engels financed the fact that Marx could devote himself to writing without having to work. Marx was not Russian as many erroneously claim in the toxic mass media.
What was the socio-economic structure of the Post-Enlightenment Period in the West?
But one of the most important aspects taking place when Marx develops his ideas is how the transition between feudalism into the Free Market economy takes place; these ideas greatly based on the ideas of Adam Smith and David Ricardo. At that time, from 1820 to 1880, there was a great rejection of religion as it had largely collapsed with the feudal system and now the Western world was being filled with states whose constitutional charters of government excluded the relationship between church and state. Marx himself would argue against these associations by arguing that religion was the opium of the people as they kept people passive and in poverty while a small group of wealthy oligarchs were left with all the affluence produced by the group. The idea of a Free Market came as a double-edged sword because although it asserted that workers had rights to negotiate and produce as argued in part by David Ricardo’s theory of value, simultaneously the expansion of the British empire with it a brutal colonization that enslaved many peoples, India would subsequently be one among many of these peoples of the East enslaved by colonization. There was much wealth accumulated even amongst the old European elites who had lost their power under the fallacy of being a divine right granted by God as rulers. Capital had to be safeguarded at all costs the oligarchs thought. From the way the elites saw the world, after the feudal system ended, it was necessary to save the stolen fortunes of Native Americans, Asians and Africans, since it was in front of this boom of ideas that demanded the equality of the human beings everywhere, so they focused on influencing the social structure that developed at the time, the Capitalist Nanny State.
Many great ideas had migrated with their thinkers to the coasts of the United States of North America between the 1600’s and the 1800’s. The idea of Cooperativism at that time had subjugated the corporate idea as we know it today since the corporation is in its present form at the beginning of the 21st century resembles more a new childbirth of the feudal castle in corporate form, a despotic and tyrannical structure where the elite above gives all orders and where there is neither voice nor vote for the workers who are the ones who produce all wealth in actuality. The previous period of Enlightenment or the illustration where Marx developed his ideas had restricted these corporate institutions which could only exist for the common good, could not create monopolies, these corporations could not own another corporation or even form monopolies of any kind, the bosses pay had to be equitable within the workers pay, etc. Many of these ideas existed as barriers for the former feudal lords to remake their feudal castles within the emerging constitutional charters of the corporation. So based on the hierarchical advantage that capital, as any rank structure provides, the corporation and the cooperatives were attacked to turn one or both into entities where capital could reassemble its feudal reign of tyranny and absolutism while usurping all the power and all wealth produced by the working class and this was achieved in the late 1800’s with the corporate person-hood SCOTUS decisions.
The Misunderstood Socialist Idea
When we try to define what socialism is, we must understand that there are many writers who have contributed to this idea and that there are many ideas all tied to the common good of society. But it is also important to remember that our society is full of indolent citizens bred to protect the system and to promote other interests against themselves. Many of these masochists are found in all social stratums of all sizes and ethnicities. There are many happy slaves and as the great Harriet Tubman once argued, “… I have freed thousands of slaves and would have freed thousands more, only if they had known that they were …” The vast majority of people do not have the most remote idea as to what socialism really is because if the working class truly understood what is at risk then they would all be socialists. Most people associate socialism with failed revolutions and state capitalism such as Cuba, or the Soviet Union when it existed, China, Venezuela, and so on. A couple of volumes of encyclopedia would have to be given to explain socialism in truth, but it should suffice to say that Marx and most writers like Proudhon defined socialism as the stage when all workers control the means of production as owners. Imagine a country full of cooperatives where the workers earn a salary while the vast majority of these workers keep the profit that they produce. For you to know what socialism truly is then you must conclude, if you are neither dishonest nor dumb, that neither Cuba, China, Russia, the Soviet Union, nor Venezuela are socialist. Why? For neither Cuba nor Russia nor China nor Venezuela nor any other country that calls itself socialist has had socialism but rather state capitalism controlled by first an elite and second by an authoritarian government because it is not the workers who own the means of production but the state or a small group of people. You must remember that there is a very similar and sometimes identical trend between anarcho (socialism) syndicalism and Marxist socialism. Just keep in mind that under any true socialist form of government it is the workers who must own and control all means of production and never an oligarchic or parasitic elite. However, you must expand a lot more so you should read here if you want to expand the understanding of these concepts.
Marx expected the original Corporation and Cooperatives to serve as Foundations
Marx hoped that corporations and cooperatives would gradually become shelters and instruments of protection for the workers. The corporation was a non-legal entity as a person and had many restrictions as well as cooperatives. These restrictions and regulations were positive because they fully regulated capital and the side effects of stratum hierarchies that brings with it the wealth and control of the means of production when these are taken over by a single individual or just a few. Marx hoped that these entities would act in a similar way and as a union contributing and safeguarding the rights of the worker as well as simultaneously being instruments of production that had a voice and a vote on behalf of the worker. The idea of democracy in the field of labor was the ideal way of initiating much of what Marx saw as the future of revolution and class struggle. In addition, it eliminated the despotism of bastardization caused by capital and the parasitic hierarchies controlling all resources. The idea of a just world where the worker who produces all wealth can be left with a large part of what was produced was the ideal picture as a future for Marx. Marx envisioned a world where the class struggle disappeared as mankind was reduced to a horizontal and egalitarian government with no one above as despot and no one below as subservient.
In the United States of North America capital sought to redo some kind of protection and found it by taking refuge in the 14 Amendment of the Constitution which gave equal protection to all human beings, including recently freed slaves, under the law. This amendment became law originally and in principle to protect newly released slaves. Amendment 14 of the constitution would end up serving as a shield to safeguard capital and allow immunity to the law and its subsequent impunity. What Marx failed to conceive was that the attack on the corporation to become a legal person was already being won shortly with three large cases in the United States of North America. The first case had been in 1819 with Dartmouth College v. Woodward. Then followed the case of Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts v. Town of Pawlet in the year 1823. Read here: The last significant case in the 19th century would be that of 1886 with Santa Clara v. Southern Pacific – 118 U.S. 394 (1886) three years after Marx’s death. If you want to explore the problem of the corporation as a person or corporate legal entity you must go here.
A Revolution without Ditches but with lots of Authority
The recreation of the corporation as a legal person, corporate person-hood, because of the three decisions in the 1800’s by the courts of the United States of North America and SCOTUS, caused a great retrogression when the impassioned rebels, those hungry for social justice, began revolutions for the next six decades after the death of Marx. The first revolutions that used Marxist ideas, almost all, were giving their first steps as never before had they tried those revolutions with such expected outcome: Workers Liberation from slavery and tyranny. Revolutionaries read and soaked themselves with ideas of freedom, breathed them, fed themselves with egalitarianism with the hunger that humanity in slavery craves freedom. But, there were several problems because it was not only the fact of corporate legal status but also there was another event with which the revolution did not count. If we imagine a world of corporations and cooperatives well restrained and which operate as legal entities without any extra judicial protection of law; for we can find a world where the idea of horizontal governance is easily feasible, the cooperative. Horizontal governance implies a direct and participatory democracy where each individual has a voice and a vote. Now that what happened was not a horizontal but a vertical governorship since the hierarchical pyramid took possession of the corporation and remade the feudal castle within this making of the corporate CEO president and the high administration like a king and his court and where the workers have neither voice nor vote. The boss CEO king gives orders and if the worker disagrees he can leave or be fired with impunity and without any form of real legal protection for the integrity and ethics of his work. Whereas in a horizontal entity there would be no such despotism as it would be abdicated to each individual participant of the labor system because workers would then be granted voice and vote by default. In addition, a horizontal government would be much more egalitarian and would provide more people in a fair way and not in an enslaving way depending on wages and without being able to collect from the profits produced since it is only one, or only a few, those who retain control and usurped power over the means of production in a pyramidal or hierarchical organization. The hierarchical order remade itself when the new kings or corporate CEOs start receiving the highest remuneration with the minimum or no labor effort or contribution at all. Let’s remember that public relations teaches how talented and strategic CEOs are playing golf while the workers break their backs; CEOs are talented to bankrupt the entire economy because of overpaying themselves bonuses and due to their inefficiency while being rescued in the tune of 29 trillion dollars in 2008 meanwhile the workers are not even making wages or salaries that match the cost of living.
What is lost in the Hierarchical Order
An ignored process, as well as relatively insignificant, is the use of hierarchies in our social structures. The social hierarchies are these organized ranks as strata where the most power being usurps the most stolen wealth accumulates at the top while those who have made the wealth and power remain at the bottom without power or wealth. Hierarchies are like a system of arbitrary castes, all hierarchy is arbitrary, that attracts to the top all those people interested in managing the lives of others while hiding many internal problems related to locus of control amongst those who remain as bosses or administrators. Since there is a level of authority and authoritarian despotism behind this scene as the pathology reveals itself from the beginning: Who wants to be making choices for someone else? Our mentally ill hierarchical society sees this as normal and has perfected this normalized state under the excuse that all billionaires started in the garage of their homes and poor which is flat out false. What advertising and marketing do to the masses is quite harmful by the means of misinformation which not ever telling us that the truth about Steve Jobs is a farce. Steve Jobs did not start without money from the garage of his house but with $150 million collected and $600 million from investors in the 1970’s and 1980’s when U.S. dollars had 100 times more buying power than today. Also, Steve Jobs is neither a designer nor a programmer as many believe. Steve Jobs said that he was the Maestro to the Apple orchestra for not knowing anything about computers or programming or design except presenting the products created to the public. Steve Jobs used a large group of computer experts who were and many are poor to this day. Those who did everything possible were never paid but robbed of their genius. Only Steve Wozniak was the true heart of everything created but his fortune even today only reaches about 100 million dollars while that of Steve Jobs reached 160.000 million or 16 billion dollars. Hierarchies allow the above stratum to usurp power and steal wealth while misrepresenting the actual worker’s effort meanwhile perpetuating the idea that the one percent above exists not only as a divine gift but with a divine right because of either God, fate or some divine entity have taken them there to the top from where they display their tyranny in the form of a capitalist mass delusion.
The greatest human potential that is lost is perhaps the potential for creation and for contribution of the vast majority of people, as each human being within a community or collectivism will not have a voice or a vote since their collaboration is ignored, or stolen, or simply never reaches where it should reach to affect the system. An idea must first receive the opinion of all members of the group, discussed and analyzed while considering its pros and cons for society, before it can become a norm for a group. The previous is what never happens in hierarchies since the hierarchic order above, with usurped power and stolen wealth, will also be the one who makes the decisions for all the other members. This leads us to a deviant and misunderstood conclusion as to what a democracy actually is. A democracy can be direct and participatory such as anarchy but it can also be a farce like the republics or supposed representative democracies where a corrupt politician is chosen so that he or she decides everything for the rest of the group. When each person must be fully informed and in its entirety in order to be able to make sound choices and decisions within the group. It is here and then that this right to having a voice and a vote is robbed and power is shifted while being awarded to the corrupt politician so that he or she can embellish the typical wrong decision making. A political figure sweetens the ear to the masses with imaginary enemies and diverts the attention from all the problems that the politician himself then will perpetuate while simultaneously representing the high upper hierarchies of power and capital with absolute immunity to their failures. The previous can be confirmed by the political re-elections of those destroying society and the environment. When a human being is given authority or power, even if the individual comes from an interest group in the lower stratum, this power will corrupt and create a form of despotism that emerges easily and is repeated indefinitely as seen in all sociological and psychological experiments during the 1960’s and early 1970’s. This idea was verified by a researcher named Philip Zimbardo at Stanford University, see here. And see also short video.
The Vicious Circle of the Revolutionary
It is admirable the conviction and passion that a revolutionaries have inside. Many of these human beings have indeed fought for the common good with heart, soul, and even their own lives most without expecting glory. From the day that they are born the revolutionary has an obsession for liberation because the revolutionary is always hungry for freedom. The revolutionary makes many mistakes on the road to revolution. The three fundamental errors in relation to these failed revolutions of the last century were:
First Error of the Revolutionary and its Revolution
Madness, do the same thing over and over again and expect a different outcome. Although the revolutionary is a absolute brave soul, but the revolutionary who wins a revolution and is not possessed by the revolution will succumb to it by winning. The revolutionary who is not possessed by the revolution is a fucking chicken full of fear while swimming in cowardice. The non-possessed revolutionary fears losing the pedestal, the hierarchical stratum, which is gained by replacing the fascist on duty with another fascist in turn, the new fascist in the form of a revolutionary. If the king is dead the last thing you want to hear is “Long live the king” since this would imply that what is happening will be repeated, although now under new administration. The revolutionary, and his court now, will repeat the same identical horrors and even worse than any fascist in power has previously done. If power absolutely corrupts then the revolutions won are full of absolutely corrupt revolutionaries. Much of the error is that it is establishing an idea that ensures changing everything and to improve everything, in principle, but under the same and identical format above: Hierarchies including Capitalism. The existing powers that be witness a lost revolution and will try to remake what they already had accomplished before and this implies sabotage to any government that is not aligned with the fascist despots as themselves. To protect himself, the revolutionary becomes bellicose and authoritarian leading him to not trust his own shadow. The last thing the crowned revolutionary seeks is a horizontal government or a direct democracy, since it will collapse if it is not ready when the attacks come; however what the revolutionary needs in his new role is the recreation of horizontal entities that are egalitarian instead of authoritarian as the previous ones. All hierarchies are intrinsically authoritarian without exception. Whether the hierarchy is stratified by control of the means of production or by capitalism, or whether such hierarchies are limited to the power of access to such means of production, in any case all hierarchies are innately authoritarian and there is no exception to know despite of so many public relations suggesting otherwise. The revolutionary also begins to see his power as something that fills him and makes him narcissistically heroic after having been a nobody in search of dignity. We must vehemently repeat over and over the fact that power corrupts absolutely and without exception. There is no benevolent ruler because only you know how to rule your life and environment best.
Second Error of the Revolutionary and his or her Revolution
Revolutions are followed by design mistakes because they do not have a socioeconomic plan that is decentralized and includes all natural and human resources to begin with. The design of an economic plan that includes current resources and potential resources through barter and other market means is fully absent. Marx was not exactly a supporter of markets since all markets are in one way or another slavers to human labor. However and while surviving in power and restructuring a society many of these changes and economic planning must be at the order of each day. It is very important to provide for the population. How many won revolutions have tried to do so? They all have as early revolutionaries did in Cuba although the last example of this is probably Hugo Chavez at the beginning of his revolution in Venezuela. However, there must be great planning not to devalue a country as it has happened to Venezuela and by simultaneously preventing a financial elite from sabotaging what has been achieved for the people. Control of internal corruption is also essential here and Venezuela seems to have failed in these socio-economic aspects by not making proper planning use or addressing corruption. The revolutionary government of Venezuela has been sabotaged by internal and external capitalist hierarchical forces. Capital will never allow a revolution to succeed and let the veil fall to capitalist scarcity. But Venezuela has also failed to plan for jobs and to release the energy it relies on, the oil it sells on the market, failing to create sources to use for renewable energy and create a country that benefits from large reserves of oil while simultaneously releasing its own territory from the dependence and consumption of fossil fuels as China is presently doing. Instead of giving gas subsidies to their people they should have sent all the fuel out and collect this profit while being internally supplied with green renewable energies. This internally engagement of renewable energies would have facilitated the releasing of the income of their largest natural resource, oil. Failing to stop internal corruption has been another big problem in Venezuela as well along with more autonomy for its people. We must remember that there is a great deal of internal and external sabotage coming from the enemies of freedom in the form of capitalist elites and the indolent masses of manufactured consent who follow them. See: https://youtu.be/YUYWrPiUeWY
Third Error of the Revolutionary and his or her Revolution
There is one element in common that is needed in all these failed revolutions and this element is: The application of the socialist idea at the heart of these societies. If socialism means that the working class not only controls but fully owns the means of production, then where are these cooperatives full of workers who own the means of production and where horizontal direct democracy flourishes within their production centers? This last element, horizontal direct democracy in the workplace, being the most essential, does not seem to exist in most revolutions beyond a mere an authoritarian regime controlled by the state and manipulated centrally and not decentralized as it should be. On the contrary, what we see in these revolutions is a regression to a centrally controlled society by a tyrannical and authoritarian elite of despotic color which imposes its whims instead of opening the doors to a direct and participatory democracy where the centers of labor, the nuclei of workers, have absolute voice and vote.
Basque Heritage of the Spanish Civil War
Spain suffered a great renaissance during 1936 to 1940 during its Civil War. Much of the resurgence came from territories that embraced anarchy or direct democracy because it showed the people that if they tried then they could create utopia. But far beyond being possible was the fact that the population would experience for the first time what it meant to be autonomous and truly free, no masters and no gods. The Catalan and Basque populations were the main groups in rebellion. The Basque and the Catalans would discover that by going into revolution they had found their voice and their vote. The period of happiness was short lived since the hierarchical instrument of capitalist fascism soon returned them to a society of scarcity and without much autonomy in reality. In the Basque country in particular there was a remembrance of anarchy and this anarchy would eventually be reflected even after fascism repressed its people. A priest named Arizmendi decided to join a group of workers and democratize their work from the heart. The Mondragón cooperative would be born of this idea of democracy within the workplace. Today Mondragon has branches all over the world and although the capitalist economy has faltered, Mondragón does its best to keep all its employees although this means sacrifices. Mondragón was founded in 1956 and its valuation today is more than 26,000,000,000 twenty six thousand million or 26 billion dollars. Mondragón belongs to its workers and everything that is done is done for the common good. Each worker has a voice and a vote within the organization. Mondragón is a clear example of democracy in the workplace. Instead of producing for a financial parasite all produce not only for the common good but also for their own good simultaneously. The structure of Mondragón is horizontal and each individual has a voice and a vote with an endowment of rights which is in total contradiction and opposition to the corporate hierarchies that the other workers face in corporations around the world.
The Impossibility of Solidarity in Capitalism
We must always remember that much of human pathology comes from fictitious hierarchies that are created within equally imperfect mortal beings. Hierarchies are controlled by inferior mortals as John Nash Jr. referred to when he wrote his economic treatises related to Game Theory. The hierarchies, whatever they are, always oppress the group below and give supremacy to the group above who end up being a few since this is a pyramidal scheme. Nature and the human race itself do have plenty of diversity, but diversity means neither inferiority nor superiority. These hierarchies flood our society and make us handicapped wherever they appear. These hierarchies are artificial social constructions which never existed before the pyramids appeared on the planet about 15,000 years ago. Hierarchies can exist anywhere authority exerts control may this be within gender, as man and woman, hierarchies by age, position of authority, social position, but the most crucial within our society is the hierarchy caused by the power that economic wealth brings: Capitalist Stratum. Capitalism creates havoc with its widespread scarcity everywhere. Capitalism is despotic since those who own capital are immune to being prosecuted by any court or law since those who have the power to write or control the law never will choose self-punishment. Hierarchies stop the flow of mass collective contribution that the great majority of voices and votes can provide to the solution of any problem. Hierarchies replace the voice of many for the restricted vision of a handful of tyrannical and despotic individuals. When many should give their opinion and give their point of view is when the voice of the tyrant despot above replaces and usurps the voice of many with his own voice. It is never possible to repress so many points of view by the limited and selfish ideas of one or more despots in the high stratum. Humanity loses and loses a lot. Most financial geniuses never look for these high-ranking ladders, but on the contrary; live with little and within a frugal realm where they do not care about power or wealth. We can see this clearly in the historical record of geniuses who were 99% of the times poor or lived with just the basic means and without any affluence. Sócrates, Descartes, Kant, Galileo, Nicola Tesla, Vivian Thomas, Einstein, etc.
Free Market Fantasies: Capitalism in the Real World
Delivered at Harvard University
(transcription courtesy of William Greene)
For those who are interested in the real world, a look at the actual history suggests some adjustment — a modification of free market theory, to what we might call “really existing free market theory.” That is, the one that’s actually applied, not talked about.
And the principle of really existing free market theory is: free markets are fine for you, but not for me. That’s, again, near a universal. So you — whoever you may be — you have to learn responsibility, and be subjected to market discipline, it’s good for your character, it’s tough love, and so on, and so forth. But me, I need the nanny State, to protect me from market discipline, so that I’ll be able to rant and rave about the marvels of the free market, while I’m getting properly subsidized and defended by everyone else, through the nanny State. And also, this has to be risk-free. So I’m perfectly willing to make profits, but I don’t want to take risks. If anything goes wrong, you bail me out.
So, if Third World debt gets out of control, you socialize it. It’s not the problem of the banks that made the money. When the S&Ls collapse, you know, same thing. The public bails them out. When American investment firms get into trouble because the Mexican bubble bursts, you bail out Goldman Sachs. And — the latest Mexico bail out, and on and on. I mean, there’s case after case of this.
In fact of the leading — top — hundred leading transnationals in the Fortune list of transnationals — there was a recent study of how they — how they related to the States in which they- they’re all somewhere, you know, so they’re all mostly here — in some National State, it turns out that all hundred of them had benefited from industrial policies, meaning, State intervention in their behalf. All hundred had benefited from the State in which they’re based. And twenty of the hundred had been saved from total disaster, that is, collapse, by just State bail-out. When people talk about globalization of the economy, remember that the nanny State has to be very powerful in order to bail out the rich. And nothing is changing in that regard. Twenty out of a hundred, again, were saved from collapse by this, including a number here.
Well, that’s really existing free market theory. There are many examples of it quite close to home. So, we could start with our own Governor, Governor Weld, who is described by the Boston Globe as a libertarian with a religious belief in free markets. And then a couple of days later, they reported that through various scams he had- his administration was able to sharply increase Federal subsidies to Massachusetts, so that- way beyond what they were before, so that he could parade as a fiscal conservative. And that’s pretty common.
Just the year before, you may recall, if you have long memories, they had to close Georges Bank — the richest fishing area in the world — because it was being overfished, thanks to a combination of deregulation and subsidies to the fishing industry, which have that odd consequence that you tend to get overfishing. So it looked as if the ground fish were wiped out, and they had to close it off. It didn’t take long for the religious libertarian fanatic, William Weld, to take the next jet plane down to Washington, hat in hand, asking for a Federal bail-out. They wanted the Federal government to declare it a natural disaster. And the reason was, as he explained, with, presumably, some scientists in tow, that there was some strange kind of predatory fish which no one had yet found, but they would find it, don’t worry. So some kind of predatory fish had come and, sort of, wiped out all the, you know, the Cod and the Haddock, and all those things. So it was a natural disaster, and therefore the general public had to, sort of, pay off the results of deregulation and subsidizing the fishing industry. Well, that’s the way to be a libertarian with religious fervor.
Another one is the leader of the conservative revolution, Newt Gingrich. Nobody is more passionate about the market than he is, in particular about what he — his own district, which he calls a Norman Rockwell world of jet planes and fiber optics, as indeed it is. Except, if you ask where jet planes and fiber-optics came from, you discover that the public paid for them, and still pays for them. And in fact he manages to get more Federal subsidies for his district than any suburban county in the country outside the Federal system. So, you can have conservatism flowering among the malls, and so on.
Or you can go back to the Reaganites, who were also very passionate about free markets for everyone else. Meanwhile, they boasted to the American business community, correctly, that they had done more- that they had instituted more protection than any post-war American administration, in fact, more than all of them combined. They had doubled import restrictions, blocking- and helped — and poured public funds into major industries to enable them to recapitalize, to protect the — in fact reconstruct, the steel industry, and the automotive industry, and semiconductors, and so on, which would have disappeared if they had opened the markets.
The Thatcherites in England were about the same. Government expenditures relative to GNP stayed pretty constant, although, anything that went to the general population collapsed. Meanwhile, military industry shot up, arms sales were booming — that’s all publicly subsidized stuff — arms sales to nice guys like Saddam Hussein, and General Suharto, and others.
Well, that’s really existing free market theory.