http://informationclearinghouse.info/article12880.htm

The Predator State

Enron, Tyco, WorldCom... and the U.S. government?

By James K. Galbraith

04/29/06 "Mother Jones"  -- -- WHAT IS THE REAL NATURE of American 
capitalism today? Is it a grand national adventure, as politicians 
and textbooks aver, in which markets provide the framework for benign 
competition, from which emerges the greatest good for the greatest 
number? Or is it the domain of class struggle, even a "global class 
war," as the title of Jeff Faux's new book would have it, in which 
the "party of Davos" outmaneuvers the remnants of the organized 
working class?

The doctrines of the "law and economics" movement, now ascendant in 
our courts, hold that if people are rational, if markets can be 
"contested," if memory is good and information adequate, then firms 
will adhere on their own to norms of honorable conduct. Any public 
presence in the economy undermines this. Even insurance-whether 
deposit insurance or Social Security-is perverse, for it encourages 
irresponsible risktaking. Banks will lend to bad clients, workers 
will "live for today," companies will speculate with their pension 
funds; the movement has even argued that seat belts foster reckless 
driving. Insurance, in other words, creates a "moral hazard" for 
which "market discipline" is the cure; all works for the best when 
thought and planning do not interfere. It's a strange vision, and if 
we weren't governed by people like John Roberts and Sam Alito, who 
pretend to believe it, it would scarcely be worth our attention.

The idea of class struggle goes back a long way; perhaps it really is 
"the history of all hitherto existing society," as Marx and Engels 
famously declared. But if the world is ruled by a monied elite, then 
to what extent do middle-class working Americans compose part of the 
global proletariat? The honest answer can only be: not much. The 
political decline of the left surely flows in part from rhetoric that 
no longer matches experience; for the most part, American voters do 
not live on the Malthusian margin. Dollars command the world's goods, 
rupees do not; membership in the dollar economy makes every working 
American, to some degree, complicit in the capitalist class.

In the mixed-economy America I grew up in, there existed a 
post-capitalist, post-Marxian vision of middle-class identity. It 
consisted of shared assets and entitlements, of which the bedrock was 
public education, access to college, good housing, full employment at 
living wages, Medicare, and Social Security. These programs, publicly 
provided, financed, or guaranteed, had softened the rough edges of 
Great Depression capitalism, rewarding the sacrifices that won the 
Second World War. They also showcased America, demonstrating to those 
behind the Iron Curtain that regulated capitalism could yield 
prosperity far beyond the capacities of state planning. (This, and 
not the arms race, ultimately brought down the Soviet empire.) These 
middle-class institutions survive in America today, but they are 
frayed and tattered from constant attack. And the division between 
those included and those excluded is large and obvious to all.

Today, the signature of modern American capitalism is neither benign 
competition, nor class struggle, nor an inclusive middle-class 
utopia. Instead, predation has become the dominant feature-a system 
wherein the rich have come to feast on decaying systems built for the 
middle class. The predatory class is not the whole of the wealthy; it 
may be opposed by many others of similar wealth. But it is the 
defining feature, the leading force. And its agents are in full 
control of the government under which we live.

Our rulers deliver favors to their clients. These range from Native 
American casino operators, to Appalachian coal companies, to Saipan 
sweatshop operators, to the would-be oil field operators of Iraq. 
They include the misanthropes who led the campaign to abolish the 
estate tax; Charles Schwab, who suggested the dividend tax cut of 
2003; the "Benedict Arnold" companies who move their taxable income 
offshore; and the financial institutions behind last year's 
bankruptcy bill. Everywhere you look, public decisions yield gains to 
specific private entities.

For in a predatory regime, nothing is done for public reasons. 
Indeed, the men in charge do not recognize that "public purposes" 
exist. They have friends, and enemies, and as for the rest-we're the 
prey. Hurricane Katrina illustrated this perfectly, as Halliburton 
scooped up contracts and Bush hamstrung Kathleen Blanco, the 
Democratic governor of Louisiana. The population of New Orleans was, 
at best, an afterthought; once dispersed, it was quickly forgotten.

The predator-prey model explains some things that other models 
cannot: in particular, cycles of prosperity and depression. Growth 
among the prey stimulates predation. The two populations grow 
together at first, but when the balance of power shifts toward the 
predators (through rising interest rates, utility rates, oil prices, 
or embezzlement), both can crash abruptly. When they do, it takes a 
long time for either to recover.

The predatory model can also help us understand why many rich people 
have come to hate the Bush administration. For predation is the enemy 
of honest business. In a world where the winners are all connected, 
it's not only the prey who lose out. It's everyone who hasn't licked 
the appropriate boots. Predatory regimes are like protection rackets: 
powerful and feared, but neither loved nor respected. They do not 
enjoy a broad political base.

In a predatory economy, the rules imagined by the law and economics 
crowd don't apply. There's no market discipline. Predators compete 
not by following the rules but by breaking them. They take the 
business-school view of law: Rules are not designed to guide behavior 
but laid down to define the limits of unpunished conduct. Once one 
gets close to the line, stepping over it is easy. A predatory economy 
is criminogenic: It fosters and rewards criminal behavior.

Why don't markets provide the discipline? Why don't "reputation 
effects" secure good behavior? Economists have been slow to answer 
these questions, but now we have a full-blown theory in a book by my 
colleague William K. Black, The Best Way to Rob a Bank Is to Own One. 
Black was the lawyer/whistle-blower in the Savings and Loan and 
Keating Five scandals; he later took a degree in criminology. His 
theory of "control fraud" addresses the situation in which the leader 
of an organization uses his company as a "weapon" of fraud and a 
"shield" against prosecution-a situation with which law and economics 
cannot cope.

For instance, law and economics argues that top accounting firms will 
protect their own reputations by ferreting out fraud in their 
clients. But, as with Enron, Tyco, and WorldCom, at every major S&L 
control fraud was protected by clean audits from top accountants: You 
hire the top firm to get the clean opinion. Moral hazard theory 
shifts the blame for financial collapse to the incentives implicit in 
insurance, but Black shows that the large frauds were nearly all 
committed in institutions taken over for that purpose by criminal 
networks, often by big players like Charles Keating, Michael Milken, 
and Don Dixon. And there's another thing about predatory 
institutions. They invariably fail in the end. They fail because they 
are meant to fail. Predators suck the life from the businesses they 
command, concealing the fact for as long as possible behind 
fraudulent accounting and hugely complex transactions; that's the 
looter's point.

That a government run by people rooted in this culture should also be 
predatory isn't surprising-and the link between George H.W. Bush, who 
led the deregulation of the S&Ls, his son Neil, who ran a corrupt 
S&L, and Neil's brother George, for whom Ken Lay sent thugs to 
Florida in 2000 on the Enron plane, could hardly be any closer. But 
aside from occasional references to "kleptocracy" in other countries, 
economic opinion has been slow to recognize this. Thinking wistfully, 
we assume that government wants to do good, and its failure to do so 
is a matter of incompetence.

But if the government is a predator, then it will fail: not merely 
politically, but in every substantial way. Government will not cope 
with global warming, or Hurricane Katrina, or Iraq-not because it is 
incompetent but because it is willfully indifferent to the problem of 
competence. The questions are, in what ways will the failure hit the 
population? And what mechanisms survive for calling the predators to 
account? Unfortunately, at the highest levels, one cannot rely on the 
justice system, thanks to the power of the pardon. It's politics or 
nothing, recognizing that in a world of predators, all established 
parties are corrupted in part.

So, how can the political system reform itself? How can we 
reestablish checks, balances, countervailing power, and a sense of 
public purpose? How can we get modern economic predation back under 
control, restoring the possibilities not only for progressive social 
action but also-just as important-for honest private economic 
activity? Until we can answer those questions, the predators will run 
wild.

James K. Galbraith  teaches economics at the Lyndon B. Johnson School 
of Public Affairs at the University of Texas-Austin. He previously 
served in several positions on the staff of the U.S. Congress, 
including executive director of the Joint Economic Committee.

_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
Biofuel@sustainablelists.org
http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages):
http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/

Reply via email to