
Capitalism and Democracy
By Hilton L. Root
The American Interest, Jan/Feb 2008
Edited by Andy Ross
Democracy’s Good Name
The Rise and Risks of the World’s Most Popular Form of Government
by Michael Mandelbaum
PublicAffairs, 336 pages
Supercapitalism
The Transformation of Business, Democracy, and Everyday Life
by Robert B. Reich
Knopf, 288 pages
Michael Mandlebaum, Christian Herter Professor of American
Foreign Policy at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies,
claims that democracy’s good name comes from the successful fusion of two
separate political traditions, one elevating individual freedom and the other
popular sovereignty.
Mandelbaum expounds two major causes for this transformation, one direct and one
indirect. The indirect cause was the global success of the Anglo-American
countries. The direct causes are economic liberty and the working of the free
market. Mandelbaum is an optimist.
Robert Reich, the former Secretary of Labor and now professor of public policy
at the Goldman School of Public Policy at Berkeley, explains that democracy’s
glittering good name is today being tarnished by the same forces that Mandelbaum
sees behind its remarkable rise. Global markets have created “supercapitalism”,
and it is killing democracy.
Even the places where democracy originated are not immune from the corroding
effects of supercapitalism, according to Reich. The global free market is
eroding individual liberty and effective popular sovereignty in the
Anglo-American world itself. Huge business organizations are so powerful that
they overwhelm the capacity of democratic institutions to constrain them.
Both China and Russia are exhibiting strong economic growth, largely through
participation in the global economy, without building democratic institutions.
In China, the Communist Party is welcoming wealthy business leaders into its
ranks. And a compliant middle class is a cornerstone of a repressive,
re-centralizing regime in Russia. The fact of growing middle classes in both
China and Russia is not translating into sentiment for democratic reforms
because citizens will forgo venues for expression and coordination in exchange
for opportunities to consume.
In India, the developing world’s other emerging powerhouse economy, measures of
economic freedom fall well below middle-income country averages. Despite being a
democracy, India is also less open to the world economy than China, which
suggests that developing-world democratic institutions can be a barrier to full
engagement in global economic opportunities.
Democracy throughout South Asia has been derailed by dynastic politics, where
trust depends on personalities rather than institutions. Winning elections is
based on patronage and upon the selective dissemination of resources as private
goods to party loyalists. Political parties typically lack respect for
parliamentary duties.
Where democracy has enabled a culture of impunity for those who can afford it,
citizen cynicism often nurtures extremism. Mandelbaum acknowledges the danger of
extremism in democracies, because radicals enjoy the protections of due process.
But in South Asia extremism thrives because democracy has failed to provide the
mass of citizens with basic endowments of health, sanitation, literacy and
public security.
When Anglo-American type firms expand their operations overseas, Mandelbaum’s
theory would assume the values and habits of the governance standards required
in their home markets are promoted in new markets overseas. However, the
American investor seeking overseas partners in under-institutionalized markets
is often best satisfied by well-connected partners, often firms owned by
entrenched elites with insider connections to political officeholders.
Western corporate collusion in the entrenchment of small cliques of wealthy
families creates enemies for global capitalism. This enmity helps to explain why
many outside America view U.S. democracy activism as a form of guiltless
imperialism. As they see it, such activism opens the door for the
supercapitalist, come to despoil the hapless masses.
There is thus a gaping hole in Mandelbaum’s analysis: The expectation that
market capitalism will create social foundations for the spread of Western-style
democracy fails to anticipate the capture of weak democratic institutions in
emerging states by wealthy minorities. Reich doesn’t use the analogy, but this
qualifies as a form of carpet-bagging on a global scale.
Hilton
L. Root is professor of public policy at George Mason University.
AR: Supercapitalism may be
better for the long-term future of our species than democratic traditions that
fail to reflect deep truths about human nature.
