Quote from Trend Following:
Continued...
Friedman was quick in response, ââ¦is there some society you know that doesnât run on greed? You think Russia doesnât run on greed? You think China doesnât run on greed? The world runs on individuals pursuing their separate interests. The great achievements of civilization have not come from government bureaus. Einstein didnât construct his theory under order from a bureaucrat. Henry Ford didnât revolutionize the automobile industry that way. In the only cases in which the masses have escaped from the kind of grinding poverty youâre talking about, the only cases in recorded history are where they have had capitalism and largely free trade. If you want to know where the masses are worst off, itâs exactly in the kinds of societies that depart from that. So that the record of history is absolutely crystal clear: that there is no alternative way so far discovered of improving the lot of the ordinary people that can hold a candle to the productive activities that are unleashed by a free enterprise system.â
Donahue (and the video of this on YouTube is classic) then countered saying that capitalism rewards the ability to manipulate the system and not virtue. Friedman was having none of it, âAnd what does reward virtue? You think the communist commissar rewards virtue? â¦Do you think American presidents reward virtue? Do they choose their appointees on the basis of the virtue of the people appointed or on the basis of their political clout? Is it really true that political self-interest is nobler somehow than economic self-interest? â¦Just tell me where in the world you find these angels who are going to organize society for us?â
Friedmanâs logic was what I was remembering as a theater full of people cheered wildly for a second Bill of Rights. How did this film crowd actually think FDRâs 1944 vision could be executed? Frankly, it was clear to me at that moment capitalism was on shaky ground. Starting with Bush âabandoningâ capitalism to bailouts for everyone to Obama gifting away the future â we seriously might be past the point of no return toward a socialization of America.
Figuring someone else must see the problems with this film, I started poking around the net for other views. One critic declared that the value of Capitalism: A Love Story was not in the moviemaking, but in its message that hits you in the gut and makes you angry. This film did not make me angry, but it did punch me in the gut. The people in that theater with me were not bad people, including Moore. They just seem to all have consumed a lethal dose of Kool-Aid! And at the end of his Q&A Moore pushed the audience to understand that while they donât have the money, they do have the vote. He implored them to use their vote to take money from one group to give it another group. Did he really say that openly with no ambiguity? Yes, sadly.
Michael Covel
P.S. Where am I wrong?