On October 2, filmmaker Michael Moore's latest documentary, "Capitalism: A Love Story," will be showing in theatres across the globe. If the documentary is anything like Moore's previous work, it promises to be provocative. In a Huffington Post column, Moore describes the film as an opportunity to see "the stuff the nightly news will rarely show you." Interviewing everyone from "someone" at the Wall Street Journal to a "whistleblower" on the Senate Banking Committee, Moore attempts to discredit capitalism by attributing ills of society to it.
But from what can be gathered of the film thus far, it seems Moore has been less than objective in showing just why exactly capitalism is intimately entrenched in the hearts and minds of so many Americans. Perhaps that is unsurprising, but the question as to why we love capitalism is a question that nevertheless deserves asking.
Few can argue that capitalism does not encourage an atmosphere of competition that can easily be characterized by intensity, and at times even aggression. The pursuit of profit can seemingly push ordinary, rational people to engage in conduct that most perceive as immoral. In the past decade alone, various corporations and Wall Street characters have found themselves caught with the proverbial hand in the cookie jar.
Dennis Kozlowski, former CEO of manufacturing conglomerate Tyco, infamously embezzled tens of millions of dollars from the company to fund a lavish and decadent life style. The same year Kozlowski's actions came to light, so did those of Bernard Ebbers, CEO of Worldcom (a telecommunications company now known as MCI). Using deceptive accounting tactics to hide millions of dollars in company losses, Ebbers and his cronies defrauded shareholders by propping up Tyco's stock price so they could continue collecting multimillion-dollar salaries.
Of course, the most infamous corporate scandal was at Enron. Once one of the world's largest energy companies, Enron was destroyed after its management was caught submitting fraudulent tax documents and establishing fake partnerships through which the company hid debt. Even more egregiously, the company intentionally cut off and restored electrical power to California cities in an attempt to manipulate its stock price. The brownouts that resulted crippled the state's economy and led to the eventual recall of then-Governor Gray Davis.
The list of such scandals goes on and on, but the basic premise seldom changes: greedy businessmen—and occasionally businesswomen—manipulate and defraud the public, ultimately costing innocent people their savings and livelihoods. Why, then, do Americans consistently and often times passionately defend and protect the very capitalist system that seems to benefit a select few at the cost of everyone else?
I cannot pretend the answer is simple, which is precisely why I remain skeptical of the ability of critics like Michael Moore to explain it. Yes, Moore is funny and yes, he is a talented filmmaker; few documentaries have even come close to replicating the kind of success Moore's films have had. But what Moore fails to understand is that where he sees capitalism as a force of control and domination, others see it quite differently.
In a word, they see it as source of freedom. A nation that wishes to allow people the ability to express themselves without excessive government regulation must also be willing to extend that freedom to matters of finance. This is not a new concept by any means, as it is one based in historical realities. It's not a coincidence that the most economically-free nations also tend to be the most democratic. I can hear the naysayers now: What about China? Well, what about it? It's one nation out of many and for what it's worth, it has only recently embraced market reforms: democracy takes time.
The American people, however, must never lose sight of the benefits of capitalism. It was the prospect of economic opportunity that brought the first settlers to the American colonies. It was after the arrival of the Puritans that the virtues of hard, honest labor became ingrained in the national fabric. American values and ideas were built upon the belief that the liberty of man is not ordained by government and no government, however well-intentioned, has the power to take such liberty away.
Entitlement programs, big-government expansionism and the unending proposals made by critics like Moore to make the system "more equal" only serve to rob human beings of both their liberty and their dignity. To say the capitalist system has flaws would not be incorrect, but I ask the advocates of the nanny state to provide an example of government that fosters the same kind of ingenuity, prosperity and respect of liberty as capitalism.
There is a reason that the best and brightest from around the world come to the United States for schooling and careers. That reason is not because we believe in a society where hard work and prosperity are taxed and regulated so as to provide "equality." It's because we value and admire those with a strong work ethic and the ability to overcome adversity, free of government interference.
If critics of capitalism feel that "equality" means everyone should be poor and reliant on the government for sustenance, then I suppose that the nanny state is indeed more effective at bringing about equality. Frankly though, I'll pass.
Jose Cespedes is a member of the Class of 2012.