The Dirty Word of "Capitalism"

Click on Image to Go To Video

By Douglas V. Gibbs
Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host

In a conversation with a person who made his fortune in the video game industry, I asked him where he thought the millennial generation was politically.  We fear they are off their rocker.  They are all about technology and participation trophies.  Their heads are in the clouds.  Surely, based on that, they must be staunch Democrat Party leftism supporters. . . especially since they are fresh out of the indoctrination camps we like to call the "education system" or the "public school system."

Jay Obernolte said that the "Millennials are actually quite conservative.  But, since they've been been hit so hard with false information, 'capitalism' is a dirty word to them.  They like free market ideas, but they don't call it 'capitalism.'  The younger generation calls it the 'open market,' or the 'uber-market.'"

When people ask me about socialism, I echo Rush Limbaugh in telling them, "It has failed every time it has been tried."  Just check out Venezuela.  In the colonies, long before the American Revolution, "utopianism" was tried, and the communal style of governance resulted in starvation, death, and the failure of the colonies who tried it.  It wasn't until the English Colonies began to use a free market style of an economic system that they began to prosper.

The term "capitalism" was hammered on by the Soviets during the Cold War.  The Americans were called "Capitalist Pigs."  It is amazing that now the same position the Soviets took is now the position of the Democrat Party, and candidates like Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton.

While the terms "socialism" and "capitalism" are relatively new, the basic precepts of these economic ideas are not.  And, when one looks deep enough, the real battle is about an even older one - the battle between individualism and collectivism.  In short, we must simply ask, is it better for a centralized system to own and control the the means of production, or is this something that should be left to private industry and individuals?  Should our economic system be based on communal ownership and socialist production models, or should we champion free commerce, private property and profit making?

The defining characteristics of periods of major growth in history can be seen as being eras of profit-making.  Competition and a desire for more riches as a result of innovation have driven history's greatest periods of growth.

While Plato called for society to be ruled by “guardians,” who had no private property, Aristotle leaned towards a society that more agreed with the individualism of the people who made up the population.

In ancient Rome, while the society remained a republic with a relatively free economic system, the society prospered.  When government began to interfere, and the republic became an authoritarian empire, more and more citizens become dependent upon subsidies and gifts from the treasury, until eventually the takers outnumbered the producers, and the failure of a government engineered economy collapsed under the weight of a lack of production.

After living a large portion of their lives under Democrat Party control, and the tightening of the economic grip by big government leftists, the younger generation may be repulsed by the term capitalism, but their experiences have shown them to be encouraged by free market systems, and less government control.  In other words, they are very conservative from an economic standpoint. . . they just don't realize it.

So, while they feel betrayed by the Obama administration, and the Democrats in general, and are more inclined to be "capitalists" (without being willing to say it), the younger generation doesn't necessarily belong to the opposition party.  The Republicans have to go get them with the right message, clear talking points, and without using the word "capitalism."

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary