Biden vs. Trump: The Market Has to Demand a Better Presidential Candidate

The greatest rhetorical problem suffered by champions of the free market is their inability to answer the question, “How?” For Five Year Plan-style communists and progressive micromanagers alike, this inquiry is easy. “How will we get more widgets?” the people ask, and out comes the exhaustive response. That the outlined programs never actually seem to work is, politically, besides the point. What matters is that they sound good. It is tough to beat something with nothing, and, beyond explaining the broader circumstances that will lead to prosperity and innovation, capitalists simply don’t know the details that voters crave. We did not know, ahead of time, that Henry Ford would develop his assembly line. We did not know that Steve Jobs’s Apple would invent the iPod. We did not know that Edison was working on a lightbulb. We knew, vaguely, that someone would do these things — or that someone like them would do something like them — but, by necessity, the specifics were all missing. Invited to share when, where, how, and with what result, we must shrug our shoulders. This, I am aware, is unsatisfying.

I mention this because, at present, I am struggling to put into more precise words the vague feeling I have that something, somewhere, somehow just has to happen to our political status quo. As a pundit-of-sorts, I am supposed to be able to predict what is going to occur — and why it is going to occur — and to do so using polls, anecdotes, analogies, historical comparisons, and other concrete tools. If I believe, as I do, that it simply cannot be the case that we are going to end up next year with two presidential candidates whom the public openly loathes, I am professionally obliged to do more than simply share my thesis, wave my hands, and hit the bar. But the thing is: I can’t, because I don’t know. Instead, I must point to the same rules that govern the free market, and propose that, as matter of elementary logic, our democratic system surely cannot be that different in kind from our private system of exchange.

About the Author

Charles C. W. Cooke

Charles C. W. Cooke is a senior editor at National Review and the host of The Charles C. W. Cooke Podcast.

Featured Tags

The greatest rhetorical problem suffered by champions of the free market is their inability to answer the question, “How?” For Five Year Plan-style communists and progressive micromanagers alike, this inquiry is easy. “How will we get more widgets?” the people ask, and out comes the exhaustive response. That the outlined programs never actually seem to work is, politically, besides the point. What matters is that they sound good. It is tough to beat something with nothing, and, beyond explaining the broader circumstances that will lead to prosperity and innovation, capitalists simply don’t know the details that voters crave. We did not know, ahead of time, that Henry Ford would develop his assembly line. We did not know that Steve Jobs’s Apple would invent the iPod. We did not know that Edison was working on a lightbulb. We knew, vaguely, that someone would do these things — or that someone like them would do something like them — but, by necessity, the specifics were all missing. Invited to share when, where, how, and with what result, we must shrug our shoulders. This, I am aware, is unsatisfying.

I mention this because, at present, I am struggling to put into more precise words the vague feeling I have that something, somewhere, somehow just has to happen to our political status quo. As a pundit-of-sorts, I am supposed to be able to predict what is going to occur — and why it is going to occur — and to do so using polls, anecdotes, analogies, historical comparisons, and other concrete tools. If I believe, as I do, that it simply cannot be the case that we are going to end up next year with two presidential candidates whom the public openly loathes, I am professionally obliged to do more than simply share my thesis, wave my hands, and hit the bar. But the thing is: I can’t, because I don’t know. Instead, I must point to the same rules that govern the free market, and propose that, as matter of elementary logic, our democratic system surely cannot be that different in kind from our private system of exchange.