There is a common conceit out there that business people are in possession of some kind of skill set that makes them uniquely suited to occupy congressional and executive seats in government. While business folk have organizational experience in general, it is hard to reconcile why the citizens of the USA would want the autocratic style of business lorded over them. Business serves the interest of shareholders primarily and stakeholders a distant second. Government serves at the interest and pleasure of citizens.
The imperative of business is to grow for the profit of the shareholders. Given this basic reality, I fail to see why a businesslike template should be applied to governance. We do not want government to grow for it’s own sake.
Business, in principle at least, has better command and control feedback. Or so goes the thinking. Have you ever tried to get an answer or some kind of satisfactory resolution to a problem from a very large company? As an individual with average cash resources, your singular pull is usually not very large. If we are going to let market forces have control of national and state governance in the manner conceived by hard-right political candidates, what of the individual?
The marketplace is a kind of 24/7 professional wrestling match. It is a Darwinistic contest of the strong vs the weak. Do we really want to be governed by this kind of system? Do we really want every single aspect of our lives to be a dog-eat-dog competition? I thought the purpose of civilization was to buffer some the harshness out of our lives. Do the proponents of 100 % laissez-faire really want the system to snuff out the weak and those of lesser means? That would be those who occupy the opposite side of the bell curve from those of means.
The notion that we should let market forces freely influence governance is popular among those of means. The privatization of government services will immediately benefit those who are already flush with resources. Because only those with current resources will be able to step into such a position. It would represent a transfer of power to those who already hold commercial power. Power is in the ability to allocate resources.
Why low and medium income republicans favor privatization of government services is a complete mystery. The loss of control over the influences in their lives to unrestrained market forces is contrary to the common self-perception of rugged individualism. Money and power tend to accumulate into the hands of a few. Examples are all over the place. This is the lesson from the age of monarchy and of robber barons.
Privatization in and of itself is not the answer. It is just another type of concentration of power that favors corporations and individuals who already have the resources to buy a seat at the table. Why would citizens of ordinary means want this?
Well, they wouldn’t want this ordinarily. But if you create a stampede of frightened citizens, it is possible for a small group of highly motivated demagogues to steer a frightened herd in whatever direction they want. This is precisely what is happening today. The overthrow of the prevalent system by such means has many examples on history. Just look around. The manufacture of consent is a thriving business.
Lamentations on Chemistry 
4 comments
Comments feed for this article
September 6, 2011 at 8:47 am
John Spevacek
Nonetheless, there are efficiences in the marketplace that are totally lacking in most governments. Up until the last year or so, you couldn’t make estimated or delinquient tax payments electronically, yet you could pay mortgages, utilities, credit cards… like that for nearly a decade. As a monopoly, the pressure to improve and be the best is absent.
I’m not saying that they have to be leading edge, but there should be a serious effort to duplicate more quickly what businesses are doing.
September 6, 2011 at 11:35 am
gaussling
Agreed. But the deconstruction of whole systems, like now the National Weather Service, is what I write about. Clearly Gov’t is too big and balky. Clearly the tax structure is out of control. Congress must be held accountable here.
What I see is a trend towards a confederate model of government. The acrimony and hyperbole over federal government by the evangelical right has a distinct ante bellum flavor. I was under the impression that we settled that matter long ago. But living in the north, I was deluded.
September 6, 2011 at 9:19 pm
myskysstillblue
We seem to be slipping backwards. Maybe, if there is such a thing, we’ve reached a high peak of civilization and rationality and are now on the downward slope. Another case of history repeating itself. We couldn’t get here without the consent of the masses though and who do you think is educating the masses? We couldn’t get here without those noisy, caterwauling pundits! I can’t help but think our attention is systematically being diverted by all this nonsense and before we know it– we’ll be caught under a system that is really not in any of our best interests. It’s too bad the evangelicals have limited themselves and their roles in this life and painted themselves in this box. I think they’re misguided. I can see them as the “tar babies” while something more insidious goes on behind the scenes.
September 7, 2011 at 5:49 am
gaussling
Elements of our culture are diverging in a serious way. I think that many people are indulging in what used to be called fascism. This was prevalent in Europe between WW1 abd WW2. The American version is a nationalist ideology wrapped in the flag and trimmed with christian eschatology. I used to think that the end times theology was faulty because it was based on iron-age physics. Now I realize that it is a template for a self-fulfilling prophesy. Rational people need to step up to the plate.