Ours is indeed a capitalist system, but the free interplay of market forces, political and economic, hardly exists
I was halfway through a column intended for today when a friend sent me a youtube featured speech in the recent World Economic Forum in Davos by Javier Milei, an Argentinian political economist whose thesis was that capitalism and the free market system had been the engine of growth and prosperity of most nations (particularly in the West), as against the socialist system where State intervention is rife.
He cited the fact that it was in the 1800 and forward when private capital became the main foundation of economic expansion, creation of jobs, and productivity gains versus the feudal years from the beginning of time where kings and other potentates controlled wealth and appointed vassals or feudal lords to administer land.
Milei’s speech has been widely followed, where he warned about the threat to an otherwise good and free system by those who even “with good intentions” promote collectivism under a socialist system.
He spoke in Spanish, but there is an AI animated translation to English, based on Milei’s own voice. Our readers will find it engrossing, and they can access it through:
https://youtube/YtegggKYR-U?si=lirlLg0lqwKh_U5
I wrote my reaction to the speech by stating I am in general agreement with Milei’s thesis, his observations and the Argentinian example he cited, as well as world economic history.
When we were young, during the times contemporary history now calls the “First Quarter Storm,” the appeal of a socialist method as response to our then unequal society was quite popular.
As we matured and had to face the day-to-day experiences of life’s struggles, raising a family and working our way to a better life, we began to realize that though socialism had an idealistic basis, it was through freedom, the liberty to own property, and competitive skills that we advanced.
The free interplay of market forces allowed us the space to prosper.
Nothing beats the free market system that rewards the hard-working, the highly motivated and the risk-takers to succeed in life.
In the Philippines, for instance, our leadership parceled land into small plots that are un-economical to modernize, and after the second generation become too small for the heirs who have, and continue to desert the lands, thus stunting our agricultural productivity without lifting the peasants from poverty.
Our poverty has exacerbated yet our food security is now in serious peril. A friend from Nueva Ecija last week told me that eventually no one will farm our lands.
China grew from mass poverty in the last 40 years not through collectivism but by embracing the natural play of market forces both internally and by competing globally.
Witness the difference between the two Koreas as well.
Still, I further reacted, the State must exercise proper regulatory powers to protect consumers, workers and the environment as the unbridled exercise of business for profit generation can lead to a very unequal distribution of wealth, especially in countries with extremely high population density (such as the Philippines).
The real problem of our country, which I keep describing as “benighted,” is the still feudal politics we practice, worsened by the manner we choose our government leaders.
Those who argue against Constitutional change keep repeating their worn-out statement that “it is not the fundamental law that must be changed, but the leaders we elect to office” and cite the “more urgent and pressing” problems of massive corruption leading to less resources to address our social ills.
Correct, except that it is the system provided by our fundamental law that has in its almost four decades of existence, allowed this exploitation by a few for selfish interests, often at the expense of the ordinary man.
As I keep writing here, politics in our country has become a business enterprise for the leaders we elect, who then pass on their positions to their family members, to keep the profits rolling in.
For these many years, we have been choosing leaders who promise populist quick-fixes rather than visionaries with long-term solutions to the fundamental ills of our society, so unlike the legendary Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore.
We have a multiplicity of political “parties” and a multitude of elected officials with little or no marginal utility, who collude with oligarchs to perpetuate their selfish interest with little or no corresponding benefits for the common “tao.”
Ours is indeed a capitalist system, but the free interplay of market forces, political and economic, hardly exists.