Attack of the Wealth-Eaters

READING Fernand Braudel’s The Wheels of Commerce recently, I was struck by how oddly dated its many, many references to “capitalism” now seem. I don’t mean to be unfair to M. Braudel: The subtitle of his book (published in 1979) is, after all, Civilization and Capitalism, 15th-18th Century, and he is striving to describe and explain a phenomenon for which “capitalism” is as good a name as any. It’s just that “capitalism” is a word we no longer feel much inclined to use. It’s the same with “socialism.” With the end of the Cold War, these words have come to seem quaint, like “dirigible” or “nylon.” No doubt (we feel) the things they name are still around in one form or another; but we choose not to think of them as we once did, as important features to be differentiated out from the general mess of experience, worthy of our concentrated attention. We have moved on. We are all capitalists now, aren’t we?

Well, no. The war against economic liberty may have changed its nature, but it is as intense as ever. Rather like the western front in World War I, it has matured from dramatic movements by great armies (Revolution! Liberation! Welfare State!) to slow attrition: forays by small units probing for weakness, sapping beneath the enemy lines, steady, remorseless shelling. It is still a war, though, to be won or lost. Capitalism needs a sturdy defense, and it should come from the Republican party in the present election.

About the Author

John Derbyshire

Mr. Derbyshire is a former contributing editor of National Review.

Featured Tags

Presidential Election

Calvin Coolidge

Bill Gates

READING Fernand Braudel’s The Wheels of Commerce recently, I was struck by how oddly dated its many, many references to “capitalism” now seem. I don’t mean to be unfair to M. Braudel: The subtitle of his book (published in 1979) is, after all, Civilization and Capitalism, 15th-18th Century, and he is striving to describe and explain a phenomenon for which “capitalism” is as good a name as any. It’s just that “capitalism” is a word we no longer feel much inclined to use. It’s the same with “socialism.” With the end of the Cold War, these words have come to seem quaint, like “dirigible” or “nylon.” No doubt (we feel) the things they name are still around in one form or another; but we choose not to think of them as we once did, as important features to be differentiated out from the general mess of experience, worthy of our concentrated attention. We have moved on. We are all capitalists now, aren’t we?

Well, no. The war against economic liberty may have changed its nature, but it is as intense as ever. Rather like the western front in World War I, it has matured from dramatic movements by great armies (Revolution! Liberation! Welfare State!) to slow attrition: forays by small units probing for weakness, sapping beneath the enemy lines, steady, remorseless shelling. It is still a war, though, to be won or lost. Capitalism needs a sturdy defense, and it should come from the Republican party in the present election.