|
|
Home | Switchboard | Unix Administration | Red Hat | TCP/IP Networks | Neoliberalism | Toxic Managers |
| (slightly skeptical) Educational society promoting "Back to basics" movement against IT overcomplexity and bastardization of classic Unix | |||||||
It’s a classical totalitarian document in that it lays out its plan of attack through the device of fraudulently accusing its opponent of such a plan. The strategy that is probably used also by sociopaths and various cults. This is a classic case of adoption of the principles of bitter enemy. Among them:
April 28, 2011 | naked capitalism
Yves here. Black’s post discusses a turning point that is not as well known as it ought to be. Thanks to reader John M for bring this post to my attention.
By Bill Black, an Associate Professor of Economics and Law at the University of Missouri-Kansas City. He is a white-collar criminologist, a former senior financial regulator, and the author of The Best Way to Rob a Bank is to Own One. Cross posted from New Economic Perspectives
August 23, 2011 will bring the 40th anniversary of one of the most successful efforts to transform America. Forty years ago the most influential representatives of our largest corporations despaired. They saw themselves on the losing side of history. They did not, however, give in to that despair, but rather sought advice from the man they viewed as their best and brightest about how to reverse their losses. That man advanced a comprehensive, sophisticated strategy, but it was also a strategy that embraced a consistent tactic – attack the critics and valorize corporations!
He issued a clarion call for corporations to mobilize their economic power to further their economic interests by ensuring that corporations dominated every influential and powerful American institution. Lewis Powell’s call was answered by the CEOs who funded the creation of Cato, Heritage, and hundreds of other movement centers.
Confidential Memorandum:
Attack on the American Free Enterprise System
DATE: August 23, 1971
TO: Mr. Eugene B. Sydnor, Jr., Chairman, Education Committee, U.S. Chamber of Commerce
FROM: Lewis F. Powell, Jr.
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/personality/sources_document13.html
Lewis Powell was one of America’s top corporate lawyers and President Nixon had already sought to convince him to accept nomination to the Supreme Court before he wrote his memorandum. Powell was famous for his successful efforts on behalf of the Tobacco Institute. The Institute was desperately seeking to prevent the government from alerting consumers to the lethal effects of tobacco and to prevent its customers from holding the tobacco corporations legally responsible for their premature deaths. The Institute played the critical role in covering up the lethality and paying for junk science designed to mislead consumers about the lethal effects of tobacco products. They were literal merchants of death, selling a product that when used as intended was likely to kill the customer.
For the past 45 years,” Attorney General Janet Reno said at a news conference, “the companies that manufacture and sell tobacco have waged an intentional, coordinated campaign of fraud and deceit. As we allege in the complaint, it has been a campaign designed to preserve their enormous profits whatever the cost in human lives, human suffering and medical resources. The consequences have been staggering.
Powell’s confidential memorandum begins by explaining that he wrote it at the request of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Powell’s first substantive sentence is that business is under assault – and anyone who disagrees with him on that point is incompetent. “No thoughtful person can question that the American economic system is under broad attack.”
Powell then explained why business was losing the public debate.
The most disquieting voices joining the chorus of criticism come from perfectly respectable elements of society: from the college campus, the pulpit, the media, the intellectual and literary journals, the arts and sciences, and from politicians. In most of these groups the movement against the system is participated in only by minorities. Yet, these often are the most articulate, the most vocal, the most prolific in their writing and speaking.
Among these articulate voices, the person that Powell most feared was Ralph Nader, who he described as “the single most effective antagonist of American business.” Powell cited a Fortune article to explain why Nader was the great danger.
The passion that rules in him — and he is a passionate man — is aimed at smashing utterly the target of his hatred, which is corporate power. He thinks, and says quite bluntly, that a great many corporate executives belong in prison — for defrauding the consumer with shoddy merchandise, poisoning the food supply with chemical additives, and willfully manufacturing unsafe products that will maim or kill the buyer. He emphasizes that he is not talking just about ‘fly-by-night hucksters’ but the top management of blue chip business.
One can understand why Powell felt so personally threatened by Nader. “Willfully manufacturing unsafe products that will maim or kill the buyer” describes the tobacco industry and Powell was that industry’s most prestigious apologist.
The issue I wish to emphasize, however, is why Powell and Fortune viewed Nader’s statements as evincing “hatred” of the enterprise system. Focus on what Fortune (a virulent opponent of Nader) says that Nader argued. Nader believed that the CEOs leading anti-consumer control frauds should be imprisoned where they (1) defrauded the consumer with shoddy merchandise, (2) poisoned the food supply, or (3) willfully manufactured unsafe products that will maim or kill the buyer. Powell and Fortune view these beliefs as radical, dangerous, and hostile to what Powell refers to in his memorandum as the “enterprise system.”
I submit that Powell and Fortune are not simply incorrect, but as wrong as it is possible to be wrong – and that Powell was blind to reality despite his intellectual brilliance in corporate law. First, is Nader the only one who believes that CEOs who commit control frauds are criminals? Anti-customer control frauds have defrauded, maimed, and killed hundreds of millions of people. In my prior columns I have focused on accounting control frauds because they are the “weapon of choice” in finance. One way of classifying variants of control frauds is by their principal intended victims. Accounting control frauds target creditors and shareholders. Anti-public control frauds target the general public, e.g., tax fraud, the illegal dumping of toxic waste, or illegal trading in endangered plants and animals. Anti-employee control frauds target employees, e.g., by not paying workers wages they are due or exposing them unlawfully to unsafe working conditions.
Anti-customer control frauds target customers. The seller may deceive the customer as to the quality, quantity, or safety of the good or service or the legal authority of the seller to convey the good and/or the promised security interest in the good. Cartels are another variant of anti-customer control fraud. The fraud is that the firms purport to be competitive rivals when they are secretly co-conspirators acting against the customers. Examples of recent anti-customer control frauds that maim and kill include the recurrent counterfeit infant formula scandals (which killed six infants and hospitalized 300,000), various lead toy scandals, counterfeit cough syrup (made with toxic anti-freeze), defective body armor for U.S. soldiers, unsafe water for U.S. troops, unsafe showers for U.S. soldiers (electrocution), counterfeit medicines including anti-malarial drugs, dwellings falsely certified to comply with seismic codes that pancake in earthquakes and kill tens of thousands. Then there are cigarettes, which were actually sold via fraud, are addictive, and lethal if used as intended. This form of fraud, addiction, and lethality was so effectively marketed that it became immune from normal laws and legal restrictions for centuries. Cigarettes have killed millions of customers and others subjected to second hand smoke.
Many anti-customer frauds do not routinely maim and kill. Misrepresenting the quality of a car to a customer can cause him a serious financial loss, but most of the hidden defects will not cause him or others physical injury. (Defects involving the brakes or safety equipment can imperil the customer, passengers, and the general public.) We call a terrible quality car a “lemon” and George Akerlof’s famous article on “lemon’s” markets was published one year before the Powell memorandum. It was this article that led to the award of the Nobel Prize in economics to Akerlof in 2001.
The Market for “Lemons”: Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism. Akerlof, George A., The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 84, No. 3. (Aug., 1970), pp. 488-500.
Economists have a Pavlovian response to any mention of Akerlof’s seminal article on lemon’s markets – “asymmetric information.” The committee that awards the prize in economics in honor of Nobel cited Akerlof and his co-awardees’ work in developing the economic implications of asymmetric information. Economists have tended to ignore, however, the context of Akerlof’s famous article. The specific examples of the sale of goods that Akerlof discusses are frauds. More particularly, each is an anti-customer control fraud – a fraud instigated by the person(s) controlling a seemingly legitimate entity where the primary intended victims were the customers. Akerlof did not discuss the variants of anti-customer control fraud that maim or kill – he focused solely on examples of economic injury due to fraudulent misrepresentations by the seller of the quality or quantity of the goods sold. More precisely, two of Akerlof’s examples – the fraudulent sale of defective cars and rice deliberately intermixed with stones – do maim and kill some customers, but Akerlof did not discuss this aspect. (Biting down on a stone can easily shatter a tooth. That causes excruciating pain, but it also exposes an Indian peasant – the fraud victims Akerlof was discussing – to a greatly increased risk of dental infection, which causes an increased risk of severe cardiac illness.) Akerlof had appropriately large ambitions in his article. He sought to provide a “structure … for determining the economic costs of dishonesty” (p. 488). Goods that maim and kill the customer impose the primary economic costs of dishonesty.
So, the first problem with Powell and Fortune’s horror that Nader believed we should prosecute those CEOs who caused the sale of the goods they knew would maim and kill their customers (and others) is that Nader was obviously correct – prosecuting those CEOs should be a top priority – globally. Prosecuting the fraudulent CEOs who “merely” cause their customers financial losses by deceptive sales of defective goods and services should be a significant priority.
Second, Powell and Fortune believe that prosecuting criminal CEOs is terrible for businesses, terrible for CEOs, and terrible for “free enterprise.” They conflate support for prosecuting criminal CEOs with “hatred” for “corporate power” and they conflate “corporate power” with “free enterprise.” Recall that this is their conclusion about Nader:
The passion that rules in him — and he is a passionate man — is aimed at smashing utterly the target of his hatred, which is corporate power.
Powell and Fortune cite Nader’s call for criminal CEOs to be prosecuted as their proof of this conclusion. But why would prosecuting criminal CEOs be bad for “free enterprise?” Powell and Fortune don’t even attempt to explain why this would be true. It is self-evident to them that a world in which criminal CEOs do not enjoy impunity from the law is a world in which “corporate power” will have been ”smash[ed]” and that absent hegemonic “corporate power” “free enterprise” is impossible. Their “logic” and rhetoric are revealing, but absurd. Wanting to prosecute criminal CEOs is not hostile to “free enterprise,” but rather essential to the success and continued existence of “free enterprise.” Akerlof explained why in his 1970 article.
Gresham’s law has made a modified reappearance. For most cars traded will be the “lemons,” and good cars may not be traded at all. The “bad” cars tend to drive out the good (p. 489).
[D]ishonest dealings tend to drive honest dealings out of the market. There may be potential buyers of good quality products and there may be potential sellers of such products in the appropriate price range; however, the presence of people who wish to pawn bad wares as good wares tends to drive out the legitimate business. The cost of dishonesty, therefore, lies not only in the amount by which the purchaser is cheated; the cost also must include the loss incurred from driving legitimate business out of existence (p. 495).
When cheaters prosper, market mechanisms become perverse and can drive the honest from the marketplace. The market becomes dominated by cheats because they obtain a competitive advantage. The most common reason that firms can cheat with impunity is that their CEOs are cronies of powerful politicians. The defining characteristics of crony capitalism are that the cronies receive subsidies, favors, and immunity from normal rules and laws. The cronies dominate the big corporations and provide reciprocal benefits to controlling politicians. Managerial incompetence and wealth flourishes under crony capitalism. Merit and efficiency suffer, income inequality surges, and class and who one knows become the primary determinants of economic and political success and power. The elites become pervasively corrupt.
Crony capitalism is the antithesis of “free enterprise.” The best way to destroy free enterprise is to allow CEOs to commit control fraud with impunity because that maximizes the perverse Gresham’s dynamic. Only big business had the power to destroy “free enterprise” in America – and Powell’s strategic plan was the best way to destroy free enterprise. As the left had long argued, it was the purported capitalists who would destroy capitalism.
When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it. (Frederic Bastiat)
Powell’s memorandum sought to glorify plunder with impunity, but he went beyond Bastiat’s warnings. Powell glorified CEOs who killed and maimed customers.
Third, and Powell is rolling over in his grave as I write this, Nader was one of the leading defenders of “free enterprise” when Powell wrote his memorandum in 1971. That was not Nader’s intent, but it was Nader’s efforts against control fraud that helped stave off for a time Powell’s embrace of a system in which elite frauds go free. That system, crony capitalism, destroys “free enterprise.” The regulators and the prosecutors are the “cops on the beat” who are essential to preventing the cheats from gaining a competitive advantage over honest businesses.
Powell could have, far more logically, characterized Nader’s position as “crusader against criminal CEOs” or “crusader on behalf of honest businesses.” Powell would never have referred to an individual calling for blue collar criminals to be prosecuted as a man determined to destroy liberty. He would have said that such an individual was increasing liberty – for criminals and crimes impair our liberty. President Nixon personally convinced Powell to accept the nomination to the Supreme Court to counter the decisions of the Warren Court, particularly the decisions adding to the constitutional protections of blue collar criminal defendants. Powell, particularly as head of the American Bar Association (ABA), was famous for his campaign against street crime. Powell’s biographer, John Calvin Jeffries, wrote that:
Powell argued that “a root crisis of the crime crisis which grips our country is excessive tolerance by the public generally – a tolerance of substandard, marginal and even immoral and unlawful conduct.” It had reached the point of “moral sickness.”
He worried that the pendulum may have swung too far in favor of the rights of criminals. Even Little Orphan Annie quoted the ABA chief: “There are valid reasons for criminals to believe that crime does pay, and that slow and fumbling justice can be evaded.” Justice Lewis F. Powell, Jr.,(2001: p. 210).
Powell, in his address to the ABA at the end of his term as President, argued that making Americans free from crime should be the nation’s “first priority” (Jeffries & Jeffries, p. 211). (Note the phrase “the rights of criminals” instead of “the rights of those accused.”) Powell conflated criminal CEOs with honest businesses – and was blind to the fact that he did so. Had he shown any logical consistency in how he dealt with criminals, Powell would have praised Nader’s efforts to have criminal CEOs prosecuted. But Powell could not see beyond class and his own experience in aiding CEOs who were “willfully manufacturing unsafe products that will maim or kill the buyer” do so with impunity. Can there be any greater betrayal by a CEO than using deceit to willfully manufacture cigarettes that maimed and killed his customers and those exposed to their customers’ smoke – for the sole purpose of making the CEO wealthy through such sales? Powell did not normally smoke, but according to his biography he posed with fellow members of the board of directors of one of the world’s largest cigarette companies in the firm’s publicity photographs with a cigarette to demonstrate his support for smoking. He showed more than “tolerance” for “immoral and unlawful conduct” – he provided them with aid and comfort. Through his famous memorandum he created a criminogenic environment in which control fraud “does pay” because he helped remove the regulatory cops from their beat and claimed that those who wanted to prosecute criminal CEOs posed such a threat to “free enterprise” that business must show “no hesitation” in marshalling its unmatched economic and political power to “attack” them and ensure that they were “penalized politically.”
Powell derided corporations that gave aid and comfort to the enemy by failing to use their dominant economic power against those who wanted to hold corporations and their senior officials accountable for “defraud[ing],” “poison[ing],” and willfully manufactur[ing] unsafe products that will maim or kill the buyer.”
One of the bewildering paradoxes of our time is the extent to which the enterprise system tolerates, if not participates in, its own destruction.
The campuses from which much of the criticism emanates are supported by (i) tax funds generated largely from American business, and (ii) contributions from capital funds controlled or generated by American business. The boards of trustees of our universities overwhelmingly are composed of men and women who are leaders in the system.
Most of the media, including the national TV systems, are owned and theoretically controlled by corporations which depend upon profits, and the enterprise system to survive.”
In Powell’s telling, business interests were the political naïf in politics. Other lobbyists were “special interests” while business was dedicated to the public interest. Special interests made self-interested demands on politicians, business did not.
Business, quite understandably, has been repelled by the multiplicity of non-negotiable “demands” made constantly by self-interest groups of all kinds.
While neither responsible business interests, nor the United States Chamber of Commerce, would engage in the irresponsible tactics of some pressure groups, it is essential that spokesmen for the enterprise system — at all levels and at every opportunity — be far more aggressive than in the past.
Corporations and the Chamber of Commerce did not make demands on legislators and did not act as special interests. Powell was not naïve enough to believe his own propaganda, but he knew that the Chamber of Commerce and its members CEOs would delight in even the most oleaginous praise. A corporate lawyer becomes expert in pandering to power.
Powell’s solution was for corporations to act like real corporations by using their wealth and ownership to take control of the universities and media and use that control to further corporate interests by causing the universities and media to extol the virtue of corporate dominance and by influencing the law to support corporate interests. But his central theme was that business must cease its “appeasement.” CEOs should show:
….no hesitation to attack the Naders … who openly seek destruction of the system. There should not be the slightest hesitation to press vigorously in all political arenas for support of the enterprise system. Nor should there be reluctance to penalize politically those who oppose it.
Powell’s specific prescriptions for how corporations should use their economic power to achieve dominance are filled with hortatory expressions about quality.
Essential ingredients of the entire program must be responsibility and “quality control.” The publications, the articles, the speeches, the media programs, the advertising, the briefs filed in courts, and the appearances before legislative committees — all must meet the most exacting standards of accuracy and professional excellence.
But Powell knew corporations’ real strength – manipulating the public through advertising and marketing.
It is time for American business — which has demonstrated the greatest capacity in all history to produce and to influence consumer decisions — to apply their great talents vigorously to the preservation of the system itself.
American corporations didn’t demonstrate “the greatest capacity in all history to produce and to influence consumer decisions” through advertising that was limited to “the most exacting standards of accuracy.” Remember, Powell’s most important experience was representing the interests of tobacco companies. Tobacco marketing had four dominant motifs – smoking was cool, smoking was adult, smoking made you sexy, and even more dishonest efforts to minimize smoking’s health risks. The advertising, marketing, and lobbying efforts on behalf of smoking were based on deception, and they did succeed in “produc[ing] and influenc[ing] consumer decisions” that were literally suicidal and potentially fatal to their loved ones.
Again, Powell’s apparent naiveté about the propaganda campaign that he was proposing that the Chamber of Commerce unleash was pure sham. He knew that businesses frequently created demand for their products through deception and he knew that if business followed his recommendation to unleash its marketing gurus on attacking those who wanted to prosecute criminal CEOs they would do so with as much regard for accuracy as they found useful for the particular attack. If misleading voters and demonizing opponents through deceptive statements worked better as a means of attack, then Powell knew that marketing specialists would have no more scruples lying about Nader than they had against lying about smoking – but he also knew that the memorandum would eventually become public and that it should be written in as self-serving and self-glorifying a manner as possible. Advertising specialists are a cynical lot, so I’m sure they got a great laugh reading the portion of Powell’s memorandum where he conflates of “the most exacting standards of accuracy” in advertising with “professional excellence” in advertising.
Freedom is the Ability of CEOs to Commit Crimes with Impunity
Powell ended his substantive arguments with the claim that regulating business destroyed freedom.
The threat to the enterprise system is not merely a matter of economics. It also is a threat to individual freedom.
It is this great truth — now so submerged by the rhetoric of the New Left and of many liberals — that must be re-affirmed if this program is to be meaningful.
There seems to be little awareness that the only alternatives to free enterprise are varying degrees of bureaucratic regulation of individual freedom — ranging from that under moderate socialism to the iron heel of the leftist or rightist dictatorship.
We in America already have moved very far indeed toward some aspects of state socialism, as the needs and complexities of a vast urban society require types of regulation and control that were quite unnecessary in earlier times. In some areas, such regulation and control already have seriously impaired the freedom of both business and labor, and indeed of the public generally.
It is a measure of how successful Powell’s strategy was in spreading the ideology of corporate dominance and impunity that some of his statements would now be anathema to business. He concedes in his conclusion that: “most of the essential freedoms remain: private ownership, private profit, labor unions, collective bargaining….” In 1971, even prominent Republicans hostile to unions considered the rights to join a union and engage in collective bargaining to be “essential freedoms.” As a Supreme Court Justice, Powell proved to be a disappointment to President Nixon and movement conservatives because he remained a moderate conservative.
Powell exemplifies the limits of even exceptional intellect and great courtesy. He did not set out to harm the public. He felt he epitomized intellectual consistency, but he was blind to how his class bias on behalf of CEOs made him totally inconsistent in his view of crimes of the street and the suite.
The “areas” in which Powell warned that regulation had already “seriously impaired the freedom of both business and labor” – that language is code for rules restricting discrimination in employment based on race, gender, etc. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the EEOC were anathema to Powell and the CEOs of many members of the Chamber of Commerce. The anti-discrimination laws applied to unions as well as employers. Powell, careful lawyer that he was, knew not to make that nostalgia for bigotry explicit in his memorandum.
toxymoron:
OMG, Akerlof gets the Nobel in 2001 for a paper written in 1970 where he already proves that some CEOs are crooks, frauds and criminals?
And in 2011, still the same: nobody (in a position to act) seems willing to prosecute those crooks & criminals.
Bananas, anyone?
Externality:
We have gone back to the days of Upton Sinclair’s 1906 book, The Jungle.
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/140/140-h/140-h.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_JungleWhile it is best remembered for its description of Chicago’s meatpacking industry, The Jungle was intended to bring attention to the following:
Adulterated Food Black writes of corporate America’s efforts to make more money have led to:
recurrent counterfeit infant formula scandals (which killed six infants and hospitalized 300,000), various lead toy scandals, counterfeit cough syrup (made with toxic anti-freeze)… counterfeit medicines including anti-malarial drugs
A century ago, large corporations across America engaged in identical conduct. As Sinclair wrote:
How could they know that the pale-blue milk that they bought around the corner was watered, and doctored with formaldehyde besides? When the children were not well at home, Teta Elzbieta would gather herbs and cure them; now she was obliged to go to the drugstore and buy extracts—and how was she to know that they were all adulterated? How could they find out that their tea and coffee, their sugar and flour, had been doctored; that their canned peas had been colored with copper salts, and their fruit jams with aniline dyes? And even if they had known it, what good would it have done them, since there was no place within miles of them where any other sort was to be had?
(Chapter 7)
Faux corporate competitionBlack writes of crony capitalism, where corporate leaders profit from collusion and suborning regulators. In Sinclair’s time, a small elite used interlocking trusts to own and control companies that seem, to the public, to be viciously competing with one another.
Sham elections. Sinclair warned that the two party system was a sham as the corporate oligarchs and party bosses decided in private who would win what seats. When an older Democrat displeased the elites, he was suddenly replaced by a Republican “reformer” to show that the system could correct itself and remove corrupt politicians. In reality, the Democratic machine quietly helped elect the “reformer:” he was even more corrupt and beholden to the elites than his predecessor. (Sound familiar?)
The rest of the time, according to Sinclair:
The city, which was owned by an oligarchy of business men, being nominally ruled by the people, a huge army of graft was necessary for the purpose of effecting the transfer of power. (Chapter 25)
And now in the union Jurgis met men who explained all this mystery to him; and he learned that America differed from Russia in that its government existed under the form of a democracy. The officials who ruled it, and got all the graft, had to be elected first; and so there were two rival sets of grafters, known as political parties, and the one got the office which bought the most votes. Now and then, the election was very close, and that was the time the poor man came in. In the stockyards this was only in national and state elections, for in local [Chicago] elections the Democratic Party always carried everything.
(Chapter 9)
Externality says:
“who would win which seats.”
attempter:
It’s good to keep explaining how corporatism and “free enterprise” are antithetical. Powell and the likes of Fortune do not support free enterprise, real competition, real innovation, real entrepreneurship, or textbook capitalism. On the contrary, they’re servants of rent-seeking oligopoly, and systematic enemies of all those things.
Anyone who truly believes in those things must want to abolish corporations completely, as the corporate form is dedicated to the subversion of all of them. This was already clear enough in theory in the 19th century, and 150 years later we have the unbroken record of evidence. By definition corporations are extensions of the government, command economy manifestations. The organizational principle automatically tends toward kleptocracy, and starting in the 1970s (Powell’s strategy memo was one of the seminal neoliberal documents) we’ve seen the full manifestation of this neofeudal kleptocracy. This is inherent in corporate logic, and the corporate form is the essential vehicle of the kleptocratic process.
So the post is good in educating toward that knowledge, although it doesn’t reach the full implications. It’s still a reformist policy proposal which does not intend to do away with organized crime in toto, but merely to curb its worst “abuses”, as reformists would call them.
(There’s also more of this kind of exculpatory nonsense:
Powell exemplifies the limits of even exceptional intellect and great courtesy. He did not set out to harm the public.
That’s absurd. How was it possible by the 1970s for an educated person to be unaware of the intrinsic malevolence of corporate rackets? Give me a break.)
We see the terminal limitations of Black here:
Anti-employee control frauds target employees, e.g., by not paying workers wages they are due.
Actually, by definition capitalism itself doesn’t pay workers what they are due. If “wages” exist at all, that means the worker is being robbed. So we see how the reformist doesn’t want to end the robbery, but just place some meager limits on it. And we’ve seen how well that works in practice.
DownSouth:
Siggy says:attempter said:
“Powell exemplifies the limits of even exceptional intellect and great courtesy. He did not set out to harm the public.”–William Black
That’s absurd. How was it possible by the 1970s for an educated person to be unaware of the intrinsic malevolence of corporate rackets? Give me a break.)
I agree wholeheartedly.
I think it goes without saying that you and I have moved well beyond what every great critic of liberalism has realized to be its greatest defect—-innocence and naïveté.
I just don’t know about the business of being innocent and naive. There also seems to be some denial involved, like say it aint so Joe.issacread:I tended to agree with many of Justice Powell’s opinions, this bit of revelation is new to me and expalins why I not infrequently disagreed with a number of Justice Powells opinions.
If memory serves, I beleive that Justice Powell was confirmed with very little effort. I wonder why?
Externality:I question if one can or should presume to move beyond the capacity for innocence and naivete. I too agree wholeheartedly, but to dump on Black here is bull. One hears similar treatments of Chomsky from another context.
These are individuals whose contributions are stellar regardless.
Indeed the contradictions are usually most significant. They keep it from being wrapped too tight. Just like innocence and naivete provide the elbow room for idealism and learning.As for exceptional intellect and great courtesy, they are preceded by the singularly apt characterization of oleaginous! He oiled his way across the floor oozing charm from every pore. And what about Powell’s work for the Pacific Legal Foundation? The class he is a function of is post Reconstruction.
DownSouth says:
Corrupt and/or fired regulators Then, as now, regulators occasionally tried to do the right thing. They were soon fired or forced to resign. The rest accepted reality, and did their best not to annoy the corporate oligarchs.Predatory lending. The protagonist (a Lithuanian immigrant) decides to buy a home, taking out a mortgage to pay for it. Because he was unable to read English, he takes the contract and mortgage agreement to several local lawyers for advice and to look over the documents. Based on their advice, he buys the house, takes out the mortgage, begins making payments on “his” house.
He soon learns that the lawyers lied to him, that the house was shoddily constructed, that he was really renting it from a trust until the “mortgage” was paid off, that the payments suddenly escalate, that he was responsible for numerous undisclosed fees and taxes, and that the lender wanted to foreclose as quickly as possible so that they could sell it to yet another unsophisticated immigrant.
Cheap as the houses were, they were sold with the idea that the people who bought them would not be able to pay for them. When they failed—if it were only by a single month—they would lose the house and all that they had paid on it, and then the company would sell it over again. And did they often get a chance to do that? Dieve! (Grandmother Majauszkiene raised her hands.) They did it—how often no one could say, but certainly more than half of the time. They might ask any one who knew anything at all about Packingtown as to that; she had been living here ever since this house was built, and she could tell them all about it. And had it ever been sold before? Susimilkie! Why, since it had been built, no less than four families that their informant could name had tried to buy it and failed. She would tell them a little about it.
(The Jungle, Chapter 6)(During the recent real estate bubble, immigrants were similarly encouraged to buy homes they were completely unable to afford. In many cases, they went to local community organizations, community leaders, or religious institutions for advice. They were unaware that the person or organization advising them to buy a home may have received referral fees from mortgage brokers, funding from banks, etc. Pleased, but extremely surprised, that they could afford a home, they signed whatever papers were put in front of them at the closing. Only later did they learn about such things as adjustable rate mortgages and teaser rates.)
The use of day laborers and mass immigration to undermine unions. In The Jungle, young, healthy workers would be hired by the meat industry and paid a good wage until they became ill, injured, or worn out by the horrible conditions. They would then be summarily fired, and replaced with another worker who would be similarly used up and replaced. By recruiting from the unending stream of immigrants, the employer was ensured a continuing supply of disposable workers who could not effectively complain and had no links to labor unions.
This tactic also allowed the meat packers to capitalize on animosities and language barriers between the different immigrant groups. If that failed, or if there was a strike, the workers were temporarily replaced with southern Blacks, who were sent back to the South as soon as the local workers became more tractable.
(Starting in the 1980s, the meat industry resumed using these tactics, replacing unionized meat packers with non-union, often undocumented, immigrants who could be quickly replaced if they became ill, injured, or troublesome. In the US, multinationals used Hispanics; in the UK, multinationals used Eastern Europeans. Wages quickly dropped, benefits disappeared, and injured workers replaced. Accusations of racism were made against former meat-packers and others who objected.)
Later, the protagonist winds up working as a day laborer building an underground railway intended to allow downtown businesses to stop relying on unionized delivery people. (While the capitalists behind the railway lacked the proper permits, they simply dismissed rumors of the railway as a conspiracy theory, and bought off politicians until the railway was complete and ready to be used.) When he is injured, he is taken to a public hospital to be treated at public expense. Since he was never paid for his work, he winds up homeless.
8:44 amNow…
Externality,Great snapshots from the past, juxtaposed to current ones to highlight how we managed to survive the 20th century, but without learning anything.
I’d like to add the following to your outstanding list.
“When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it.” (Frederic Bastiat)
Powell’s memorandum sought to glorify plunder with impunity, but he went beyond Bastiat’s warnings. Powell glorified CEOs who killed and maimed customers.
Then…
Now and then, the comedy breaks into the horror itself, and results in stories, presumably true enough, whose macabre humor easily surpasses that of any Surrealist invention. Such was the story told by Eichmann during the police examination about the unlucky Kommerzialrat Storfer of Vienna, one of the representatives of the Jewish community. Eichmann had received a telegram from Rudolf Hoss, Commandant of Auschwitz, telling him that Storfer had arrived and had urgently requested to see Eichmann. “I said to myself: O.K., this man has always behaved well, that is worth my while… I’ll go there myself and see what is the matter with him… It was a great inner joy to me that I could at least see the man with whom I had worked for so many long years, and that we could speak with each other.” Six weeks after this normal human encounter, Storfer was dead—-not gassed, apparently, but shot.
Is this a textbook case of bad faith, of lying self-deception combined with outrageous stupidity? Or is it simply the case of the eternally unrepentant criminal (Dostoevski once mentions in his diaries that in Siberia, among scores of murderers, rapists, and burglars, he never met a single man who would admit that he had done wrong) who cannot afford to fact reality because his crime has become part and parcel of it? Yet Eichmann’s case is different from that of the ordinary criminal, who can shield himself effectively against the reality of a non-criminal world only within the narrow limits of a gang. Eichmann needed only to recall the past in order to feel assured that he was not lying and that he was not deceiving himself, for he and the world he lived in had once been in perfect harmony. And that German society of eighty million people had been shielded against reality and factuality by exactly the same means, the same self-deception, lies, and stupidity that had now become ingrained in Eichmann’s mentality. These lies changed from year to year, and they frequently contradicted each other; moreover, they were not necessarily the same for the various branches of the Party hierarchy or the people at large. But the practice of self-deception had become so common, almost a moral prerequisite for survival, that even now, eighteen years after the collapse of the Nazi regime, when most of the specific content of its lies has been forgotten, it is sometimes difficult not to believe that mendacity has become an integral part of the German national character.
DownSouth says:
8:48 am
P.S.—-All this gives new meaning to Milan Kundera’s wise counsel:The struggle of people against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting. ■ skippy says:
9:24 amEric says:
History is a pit, if you don’t write it for general consumption, get in it.Skippy…scribes use bulldozers (D-dogma) these days.
8:50 amExternality says:
“Lewis Powell’s call was answered by the CEOs who funded the creation of Cato, Heritage, and hundreds of other movement centers.”Since corporations pass on the cost of expenses to consumers, isn’t the funding of “movement centers” another form of customer control fraud?
While reading this article, I kept thinking of Hillary Clinton not missing a beat during her hortatory (learned a new word) speech on freedom of expression, while hired goons manhandled a peaceful, elderly protester and whisked him away to jail.
Plus c’est la même chose.
9:52 amFrago says:
Or Hillary Clinton demanding that foreign countries not impose any restrictions on Internet use, having the State Department fund software to help citizens of foreign countries bypass their countries’ Internet restrictions, and supporting efforts by the Clinton, Bush (43), and Obama administrations to restrict, monitor, and censor Internet usage by American citizens.While the Obama administration recently proposed a national system to establish the identity of Internet users, the concept originated in the Clinton administration.
Provisions of the Communications Decency Act and Child Online Protection act variously criminalized making available online (where it could be seen by minors) content that was “offensive,” “harmful to minors,” or “indecent.” Prosecutions could be brought anywhere in the US and would be based on local standards where case was brought, not where the content originated.
The only way to avoid prosecution was for websites to verify and record the age and identity of each user using credit card, financial, and other records and to make the information readily available to law enforcement. A massive outcry ensued from free speech, LGBT, HIV/AIDS, and other groups. The relevant provisions of the CDA were struck down by the Supreme Court. The high court later upheld a decision enjoining COPA and declined to review a subsequent appellate decision ruling it unconstitutional.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Decency_Act#Anti-indecency_and_anti-obscenity_provisions
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reno_v._American_Civil_Liberties_Union
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_Online_Protection_Act
http://www.nytimes.com/1996/02/08/us/protest-cyberspace-style-for-new-law.html?src=pm
10:04 amTom Crowl says:
Time for a constitutional convention. Time to change the rules of the game. Time to end corporate shadow government.
10:08 amLeeAnne says:
There are no wise few. Every aristocracy that has ever existed has behaved, in all essential points, exactly like a small mob.
– G. K. ChestertonDon’t expect an oligarchy to reform itself!
– MEHe who will not reason is a bigot; he who cannot is a fool; and he who dares not is a slave.
– Sir William Drummond
10:15 amDan Duncan says:
The regulators and the prosecutors are the “cops on the beat” who are essential to preventing the cheats from gaining a competitive advantage over honest businesses.No mention of an active powerful press of fearless investigative reporting. More naivete? Or was it unthinkable in 1970 that the free press could be eliminated?
Imus complaining about how Fox watches every little word; he really hasn’t a clue, sounding more like a bunch of giggling high school girls. Shortly thereafter, a voice reports on Citi quarterly results finishing it with, “it is now trading on the FREE market at …”
if that’s not irony … there are lots of examples if you can stand listening to this stuff. My computer is down. That’s my excuse.
10:31 amSiggy says:
Is the Bill Black post dishonest, or just plain stupid? Seriously, I can’t tell.I think much of the problem is that Black is attempting to take on an “adult” matter, but he does so through the prism and prose of a 14 year old. A perfect example comes when Black outlines (finally) the crux of his post after about 15 paragraphs when he states: “I submit that Powell and Fortune are not simply incorrect, but as wrong as it is possible to be wrong….” C’mon, man. You are a University Professor for crying out loud. “…wrong as it is possible to be wrong….”?
As to the Herculean effort needed to parse the rest of the post…
Notice how Black immediately poisons the well with respect to Powell’s representation of the Tobacco Institute. “Powell was famous for his successful efforts on behalf of the Tobacco Institute…The Institute played the critical role in covering up the lethality and paying for junk science designed to mislead consumers about the lethal effects of tobacco products. They were literal merchants of death, selling a product that when used as intended was likely to kill the customer.” Later in the post, Black actually describes Powell as a “Tobacco Apologist”.
Hey Bill, Powell didn’t conduct “successful efforts on behalf of the Tobacco Institute”…and he wasn’t an “apologist; he was the Tobacco Institute’s f*cking attorney. There’s a wee bit of distinction between the damning “he was a tobacco apologist who conducted successful efforts on behalf of a merchant of death” and being a goddamn attorney. I would imagine that even a 1st year law student would know this….
[What a joke. It's this kind of blatant stupidity that paves the way for similar attacks on GITMO defense attorneys whose mission is distorted into "conducting successful efforts on behalf of terrorists". And Bill Black is an attorney for cryin' out loud.]
After exhibiting a failure to grasp the most fundamental responsibility of attorney as advocate, Black simply spends the rest of the post in a feckless distortion of the Powell memo…as though Powell wrote it for the purpose of paving the way for more corporate fraud.
Take Black’s discussion of Powell’s discussion of Ralph Nader. Black asserts that Powell was threatened by Nader because Powell was “horrified” at the prospect of prosecuting CEOs for willfully selling defective goods.
Get it straight: Powell mentioned Nader in one single paragraph. Powell asserted that Nader was part of a group hellbent on destroying legitimate businesses by implying that it was not just “fly-by-night hucksters” who were wantonly “defrauding the consumer with shoddy merchandise, poisoning the food supply with chemical additives, and willfully manufacturing unsafe products that will maim or kill the buyer”, but that the management of Blue-Chip companies was willfully and consistently doing the same.
Powell did NOT assert that consumer fraud go un-prosecuted. Nor did Powell defend fraud. Powell simply asserted that Nader was a problem because Nader tended to lump all businesses together as being a cartel of fraud. Powell was this shot-gun approach. Re-read the damn memo.
The only thing appropriate about Black’s post is it’s closing paragraph. Black asserts that Powell used “code-words” in his memo. The implication being that the code-words were a secret message to his followers to be vigilant against laws which might restrict discrimination on the basis of race and equity. Blacks states that Powell had to resort to these “code-words” because Powell was a “careful lawyer” who knew better than to expose his “nostalgia for bigotry.” Yeah, OK Bill. Powell is ever the lawyer–except, of course when Powell is defending his f*cking clients;then Powell is an apologist.
Such ridiculous bullshit is indeed, an appropriate close to a post that’s…that’s…that’s “wrong as it is possible to be wrong.”
What a joke.
Powell wrote a call-to-arms in response to what he saw as an all out attack on business in this post 1960s climate.
There is certainly room for reasonable disagreement with the Powell memo. Furthermore, it’s reasonable to lament the memo as being a harbinger of the undesirable pendulum in corporate power.But the analysis of the memo needs to be done through lens of a more insightful and mature commentator. Black, with the intellectual rigor and depth of an 8th grader acts as if Powell was some kind of death-fraud apologist with a “nostalgia for bigotry”.
At best, the Black post is merely the product of an immature, simple-minded professor. At worst, it’s a purposeful distortion and total bullshit.
Either way, in the end, the Black post was pathetic and should serve to embarrass any of his colleagues at the University of Missouri-Kansas City by virtue of association.
11:38 amScottS says:
Bit over the top with this piece. Why are you mad at Bill Black?To my mind he is one of the best voices for revealing the pandemic of financial fraud that we find ourselves mired in.
11:42 amAnonymous Jones says:
Struck a nerve, did he?Hey Bill, Powell didn’t conduct “successful efforts on behalf of the Tobacco Institute”…and he wasn’t an “apologist; he was the Tobacco Institute’s f*cking attorney. There’s a wee bit of distinction between the damning “he was a tobacco apologist who conducted successful efforts on behalf of a merchant of death” and being a goddamn attorney. I would imagine that even a 1st year law student would know this….
So it’s okay to knowingly lie as long as you’re getting paid for it? Gotcha.
[What a joke. It's this kind of blatant stupidity that paves the way for similar attacks on GITMO defense attorneys whose mission is distorted into "conducting successful efforts on behalf of terrorists". And Bill Black is an attorney for cryin' out loud.]
As if to prove Black’s point on the confusion of accused criminals and convicted criminals…
Get it straight: Powell mentioned Nader in one single paragraph. Powell asserted that Nader was part of a group hellbent on destroying legitimate businesses by implying that it was not just “fly-by-night hucksters” who were wantonly “defrauding the consumer with shoddy merchandise, poisoning the food supply with chemical additives, and willfully manufacturing unsafe products that will maim or kill the buyer”, but that the management of Blue-Chip companies was willfully and consistently doing the same.
What does Nader get out of “destroying legitimate business?” Everything he has done is consistent with holding businesses accountable for fraud or tort infractions.
12:38 pmSome reader says:
Your technique of labeling those you disagree with as “sophomoric” or “14 year-olds” is less effective than you might think. It becomes even less persuasive *every* *single* *time* it is used. Nothing else in your bag of tricks? More attempts at humor? I guess I can be happy *that* has mostly stopped.Clearly, Black is not a child, and clearly Black does not think or write as a teenager does. This claim exposes you as a moron. It also exposes you as completely unable to grasp objective reality within the first few paragraphs of your sad and embarrassing attempt to fight for what you perceive is better way to structure the world.
What is the most embarrassing thing about your long-winded misfire is that there are *hundreds* of ways to legitimately criticize Black and *his* view of the world, but you are clearly too incompetent to see those ways. Your insistence on unintentionally embarrassing yourself time after time shows a tremendous persistence for self-debasement.
6:06 pmBenedict@Large says:
Whenever I see a comment by Dan Duncan, I immediately skim over it. Dan has never said anything worth reading, and I refuse to waste any more of my life on his blather. I think I speak for a lot of regular readers when I say this.On the other hand, when I see a comment by Anonymous Jones, I pay attention since Anonymous Jones has been regularly insightful. When I come across Anonymous Jones responding to Dan Duncan, it’s a toss up as to whether I’ll read it.
2:36 pmmonday1929 says:
If you don’t like this sort of writing, Dan, why don’t you just go somewhere else? Or are you PAID to write inflamatory bullshit like this?
3:37 pmmcgee says:
Ever hear of a “mob lawyer”? he wasn’t representing them at trial, he was advising Tobacco om ways to continue to kill with (legal) impunity. If the Gitmo lawyers were aiding an organization called “The Terrorist Institute” it would be right to hold them accountable.
5:54 pmHugh says:
Golf clap for you Dan. A for effort, F for making an argument capable of changing anyone’s viewpoint toward your worldview.Wish I could send you a plaque for your wall:
“Frequently wrong but never in doubt.”
1:21 pmattempter says:
Unsurprisingly, I agree with attempter’s use of the word kleptocracy here. It seems that Bill Black is working his way toward this concept but isn’t quite there yet. He describes devastating frauds that as he says affect hundreds of millons. If that isn’t kleptocracy, what is?I agree too that he cuts Powell too much slack. Powell’s memo is not the statement of a brilliant man who happens to be wrong. It is the expression of a criminal mind. If the Powell memo is not a manifesto for class warfare, what is?
We really need to come to terms with the ideas of kleptocracy, class warfare, and wealth inequality and seek to understand how they permeate our society. But also because this all has been going on for the last 35 years, the Powell memo being something of a precursor, we need to reconsider our understanding of those years, and the people and actions in them, in the light of these concepts. Our current histories have been largely written by the kleptocrats and their minions and reflect their interests. I have said before we need a theory of kleptonomics. We also need a history of it. As long as we steer clear of these and delay their implementation we empower the kleptocrats and the class war they are waging against us.
6:05 pmJim says:
It’s a classical totalitarian document in that it lays out its plan of attack through the device of fraudulently accusing its opponent of such a plan. Anyone in the know, reading about what all those nasty hippies were allegedly doing, was supposed to understand: “Here’s what we need to do.”
1:57 pmattempter says:
As the recent financial/economic crisis increasingly calls into question the liberal political order, Down South’s reference to Arendt’s “Eichmann in Jerusalem” raises again. the issue of the nature and foundations of totalitarianism.In her earlier book “The Origins to Totalitarianism” she essentially argued that “the aggressiveness of totalitarianism springs not from the lust for power…not for profit but only for ideological reasons,to make the world consistent….”
Arendt called this mix of ideology and state terror “absolute evil.”
But after she covered the Eichmann trial she subtitled her then new work “A Report on the Banality of Evil.”
In her last uncompleted essay “Life of the Mind” Arendt notes in her introduction that in observing Eichmann “she was struck by a manifest shallowness in the doer that made it impossible to trace the incontestable evil of his deeds to any deeper level of roots or motive.” She goes on to say that Eichmann seemed “quite ordinary, commonplace and neither demonic nor monstrous. There were no signs in him of firm ideological conviction or of specific evil motive.”
We seem left with two contrasting conclusions. In “Origins” totalitarianism was seen as a demonic evil driven by ideology in “Eichmann in Jerusalem” totalitarianism, as symbolized by Eichmann, seemed to be a more banal bureaucratic, nonideological force.
Such contradictory positions on the totalitarian phenomena by one of our most profound modern political philosophers seems to require we focus not only on the economic origins and foundation of this crisis but also on our own internal weaknesses as human beings–if the totalitarian trajectory is to be avoided in the future.
6:13 pmAnjonR says:
It’s not a contradiction. The ideology is formulated by rogue intellectuals who lead what Arendt calls the mob, “the cast-off detritus of all classes”. These form and lead the totalitarian movement.Then, when a crisis like the Depression shatters social stability, driving the masses of “atomized individuals” (normal people) to desperation, they turn to the movement seeking their salvation within it, and bring it to power. But they remain normal, banal individuals. Only now many of them embody the banality of evil.
Chapter one of the third volume, “A Classless Society”, gives the most extensive discussion.
3:48 pmMickey Marzick in Akron, Ohio says:
I remember my grad school professor for assigning the the Powell memo for reading!
3:48 pmJay says:
The first shot across the bow signifying an end to the much-touted postwar consensus between CAPITAL and LABOR? The smoking gun for what would become MARKET TOTALITARIANISM?Either way, Powell’s memorandum of 1971 points up the fact that the postwar consensus was unraveling way before Ronald Reagan became President. It also illustrates how the “revolutions” of the 60s were followed by the COUNTERREVOLUTION in the board room whereby corporate America set out to capture the institutions of civil society for the purpose of promoting and securing the MARKET in the hearts and minds of the American people as the one size fits all solution to everything. But it was not confined to the boardroom for long…
Powell’s memorandum should also dispel the idea that this neoliberal experiment was an elite conspiracy absolving the American people of their culpability in its ascendance. All one had to do was read between the lines to see the writing on the wall.
Whether position papers from the likes of the Heritage Foundation or the Cato institute, Powell’s memorandum illustrates that the counterrevolution was a deliberate effort by the ruling class to take back the political economic agenda in order to make America safe for “free enterprise”. It attests to the virulent CLASS-CONSCIOUSNESS of the ruling class in this country that has never been far below the surface. Finally, it forces one to admit that the period from 1932-1968 [the New Deal] was a historical anomaly brought on by the collapse of the capitalist economic system in 1929. Four decades on, the New Deal has morphed into the Raw Deal underpinned by an ideological hegemony supportive of MARKET TOTALITARIANISM. The fact that the financial collapse has yet to usher in any meaningful reform attests to how successful the “antidemocratic strategy” proffered by Lewis Powell has been in capturing the hearts and minds of the American people. Change we can believe in is not likely in such a sociopolitical environment.
4:30 pmcurlydan says:
I find it funny as hell when economists act all shocked that big businessmen and their advocates don’t actually care that much for genuine free enterprise.Why the hell would our corporate elites want capitalism? Capitalism is all about competition. The problem with competition is that nobody wins every time.
If I own a widget factory, the last thing I want is free and fair competition. Somebody might come along and and start selling better and cheaper widgets and put me out of business.
Powell didn’t advocate crimogenic policies by accident. He and the men he was addressing in his memo wanted to transition to a kleptocracy in which their continued wealth and status was guaranteed to remain intact regardless of the quality of their work.
Staying on top in a competitive market is damn hard work. Making vast fortunes by exploiting a government-backed monopoly on criminal behavior is easier and a lot less stressful. Why work yourself into an early grave when you can just go out and rob or scam some schmuck?
5:10 pmUp the Ante says:
“Accounting control frauds target creditors and shareholders.”Unfortunately, I think we must also add the tax payer to the list of targets of accounting fraud given that most accounting frauds of the past 5 years have been covered by the tax payer instead of shareholds and especially creditors.
6:49 pmUp the Ante:
There is something troublingly suspicious about Bill Black.He has worked extensively with OTS, as he tells you in his book. OTS, along with OCC, is undeniably the seat of conspiracy, yet Bill has not been taking them to task?
Almost, they helped to form his present career, so no go to?
Black has mentioned the FBI warning about an epidemic of mortgage fraud in 2004, then they went silent. This is not of central importance to the explainer of ‘control fraud’? Why the hell isn’t it?
LONGtime lurker here on NC.
“Anti-public control frauds target the general public ..”Yes, they certainly do, Bill.
Some of them possess three-letter acronyms, as well.
It IS time to come full circle, Mr. Black. Your book on the S&L crisis is impossibly revealing: answer your own challenge! Leave a Reply
Click here to cancel reply.
Attack of American Free Enterprise SystemDOCUMENT DESCRIPTION
In this 1971 memo to Eugene Sydnor at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, lawyer Lewis Franklin Powell Jr. calls for business to play a more activist role in American politics. The memo was written two months before President Nixon nominated him to the Supreme Court. The memo is credited with inspiring the founding of many conservative think tanks, including the Heritage Foundation, the Cato Institute and the Manhattan Institute.
TRANSCRIPT:
Confidential Memorandum:
Attack of American Free Enterprise System
Date: August 23, 1971
T0: Mr. Eugene B. Sydnor, Jr., Chairman, Education Committee, U.S. Chamber of Commerce
From: Lewis F. Powell, Jr.This memorandum is submitted at your request as a basis for the discussion on August 24 with Mr. Booth (executive vice president) and others at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The purpose is to identify the problem, and suggest possible avenues of action for further consideration.
Dimensions of the Attack
No thoughtful person can question that the American economic system is under broad attack. 1 This varies in scope, intensity, in the techniques employed, and in the level of visibility.
There always have been some who opposed the American system, and preferred socialism or some form of statism (communism or fascism). Also, there always have been critics of the system, whose criticism has been wholesome and constructive so long as the objective was to improve rather than to subvert or destroy.
But what now concerns us is quite new in the history of America. We are not dealing with sporadic or isolated attacks from a relatively few extremists or even from the minority socialist cadre. Rather, the assault on the enterprise system is broadly based and consistently pursued. It is gaining momentum and converts.
Sources of the Attack
The sources are varied and diffused. They include, not unexpectedly, the Communists, New Leftists and other revolutionaries who would destroy the entire system, both political and economic. These extremists of the left are far more numerous, better financed, and increasingly are more welcomed and encouraged by other elements of society, than ever before in our history. But they remain a small minority, and are not yet the principal cause for concern.
The most disquieting voices joining the chorus of criticism come from perfectly respectable elements of society: from the college campus, the pulpit, the media, the intellectual and literary journals, the arts and sciences, and from politicians. In most of these groups the movement against the system is participated in only by minorities. Yet, these often are the most articulate, the most vocal, the most prolific in their writing and speaking.
Moreover, much of the media-for varying motives and in varying degrees-either voluntarily accords unique publicity to these "attackers," or at least allows them to exploit the media for their purposes. This is especially true of television, which now plays such a predominant role in shaping the thinking, attitudes and emotions of our people.
One of the bewildering paradoxes of our time is the extent to which the enterprise system tolerates, if not participates in, its own destruction.
The campuses from which much of the criticism emanates are supported by (i) tax funds generated largely from American business, and (ii) contributions from capital funds controlled or generated by American business. The boards of trustees of our universities overwhelmingly are composed of men and women who are leaders in the system.
Most of the media, including the national TV systems, are owned and theoretically controlled by corporations which depend upon profits, and the enterprise system to survive.
Tone of the Attack
This memorandum is not the place to document in detail the tone, character, or intensity of the attack. The following quotations will suffice to give one a general idea:
William Kunstler, warmly welcomed on campuses and listed in a recent student poll as the "American lawyer most admired," incites audiences as follows:
"You must learn to fight in the streets, to revolt, to shoot guns. We will learn to do all of the things that property owners fear." 2 The New Leftists who heed Kunstler's advice increasingly are beginning to act -- not just against military recruiting offices and manufacturers of munitions, but against a variety of businesses: "Since February, 1970, branches (of Bank of America) have been attacked 39 times, 22 times with explosive devices and 17 times with fire bombs or by arsonists." 3 Although New Leftist spokesmen are succeeding in radicalizing thousands of the young, the greater cause for concern is the hostility of respectable liberals and social reformers. It is the sum total of their views and influence which could indeed fatally weaken or destroy the system.A chilling description of what is being taught on many of our campuses was written by Stewart Alsop:
"Yale, like every other major college, is graduating scores of bright young men who are practitioners of 'the politics of despair.' These young men despise the American political and economic system . . . (their) minds seem to be wholly closed. They live, not by rational discussion, but by mindless slogans." 4 A recent poll of students on 12 representative campuses reported that: "Almost half the students favored socialization of basic U.S. industries." 5
A visiting professor from England at Rockford College gave a series of lectures entitled "The Ideological War Against Western Society," in which he documents the extent to which members of the intellectual community are waging ideological warfare against the enterprise system and the values of western society. In a foreword to these lectures, famed Dr. Milton Friedman of Chicago warned: "It (is) crystal clear that the foundations of our free society are under wide-ranging and powerful attack -- not by Communist or any other conspiracy but by misguided individuals parroting one another and unwittingly serving ends they would never intentionally promote." 6
Perhaps the single most effective antagonist of American business is Ralph Nader, who -- thanks largely to the media -- has become a legend in his own time and an idol of millions of Americans. A recent article in Fortune speaks of Nader as follows:
"The passion that rules in him -- and he is a passionate man -- is aimed at smashing utterly the target of his hatred, which is corporate power. He thinks, and says quite bluntly, that a great many corporate executives belong in prison -- for defrauding the consumer with shoddy merchandise, poisoning the food supply with chemical additives, and willfully manufacturing unsafe products that will maim or kill the buyer. He emphasizes that he is not talking just about 'fly-by-night hucksters' but the top management of blue chip business." 7A frontal assault was made on our government, our system of justice, and the free enterprise system by Yale Professor Charles Reich in his widely publicized book: "The Greening of America," published last winter.
The foregoing references illustrate the broad, shotgun attack on the system itself. There are countless examples of rifle shots which undermine confidence and confuse the public. Favorite current targets are proposals for tax incentives through changes in depreciation rates and investment credits. These are usually described in the media as "tax breaks," "loop holes" or "tax benefits" for the benefit of business. * As viewed by a columnist in the Post, such tax measures would benefit "only the rich, the owners of big companies." 8
It is dismaying that many politicians make the same argument that tax measures of this kind benefit only "business," without benefit to "the poor." The fact that this is either political demagoguery or economic illiteracy is of slight comfort. This setting of the "rich" against the "poor," of business against the people, is the cheapest and most dangerous kind of politics.
The Apathy and Default of Business
What has been the response of business to this massive assault upon its fundamental economics, upon its philosophy, upon its right to continue to manage its own affairs, and indeed upon its integrity?
The painfully sad truth is that business, including the boards of directors' and the top executives of corporations great and small and business organizations at all levels, often have responded -- if at all -- by appeasement, ineptitude and ignoring the problem. There are, of course, many exceptions to this sweeping generalization. But the net effect of such response as has been made is scarcely visible.
In all fairness, it must be recognized that businessmen have not been trained or equipped to conduct guerrilla warfare with those who propagandize against the system, seeking insidiously and constantly to sabotage it. The traditional role of business executives has been to manage, to produce, to sell, to create jobs, to make profits, to improve the standard of living, to be community leaders, to serve on charitable and educational boards, and generally to be good citizens. They have performed these tasks very well indeed.
But they have shown little stomach for hard-nose contest with their critics, and little skill in effective intellectual and philosophical debate.
A column recently carried by the Wall Street Journal was entitled: "Memo to GM: Why Not Fight Back?" 9 Although addressed to GM by name, the article was a warning to all American business. Columnist St. John said:
"General Motors, like American business in general, is 'plainly in trouble' because intellectual bromides have been substituted for a sound intellectual exposition of its point of view." Mr. St. John then commented on the tendency of business leaders to compromise with and appease critics. He cited the concessions which Nader wins from management, and spoke of "the fallacious view many businessmen take toward their critics." He drew a parallel to the mistaken tactics of many college administrators: "College administrators learned too late that such appeasement serves to destroy free speech, academic freedom and genuine scholarship. One campus radical demand was conceded by university heads only to be followed by a fresh crop which soon escalated to what amounted to a demand for outright surrender."
One need not agree entirely with Mr. St. John's analysis. But most observers of the American scene will agree that the essence of his message is sound. American business "plainly in trouble"; the response to the wide range of critics has been ineffective, and has included appeasement; the time has come -- indeed, it is long overdue -- for the wisdom, ingenuity and resources of American business to be marshalled against those who would destroy it.
Responsibility of Business Executives
What specifically should be done? The first essential -- a prerequisite to any effective action -- is for businessmen to confront this problem as a primary responsibility of corporate management.The overriding first need is for businessmen to recognize that the ultimate issue may be survival -- survival of what we call the free enterprise system, and all that this means for the strength and prosperity of America and the freedom of our people.
The day is long past when the chief executive officer of a major corporation discharges his responsibility by maintaining a satisfactory growth of profits, with due regard to the corporation's public and social responsibilities. If our system is to survive, top management must be equally concerned with protecting and preserving the system itself. This involves far more than an increased emphasis on "public relations" or "governmental affairs" -- two areas in which corporations long have invested substantial sums.
A significant first step by individual corporations could well be the designation of an executive vice president (ranking with other executive VP's) whose responsibility is to counter-on the broadest front-the attack on the enterprise system. The public relations department could be one of the foundations assigned to this executive, but his responsibilities should encompass some of the types of activities referred to subsequently in this memorandum. His budget and staff should be adequate to the task. Possible Role of the Chamber of Commerce
But independent and uncoordinated activity by individual corporations, as important as this is, will not be sufficient. Strength lies in organization, in careful long-range planning and implementation, in consistency of action over an indefinite period of years, in the scale of financing available only through joint effort, and in the political power available only through united action and national organizations.
Moreover, there is the quite understandable reluctance on the part of any one corporation to get too far out in front and to make itself too visible a target.
The role of the National Chamber of Commerce is therefore vital. Other national organizations (especially those of various industrial and commercial groups) should join in the effort, but no other organizations appear to be as well situated as the Chamber. It enjoys a strategic position, with a fine reputation and a broad base of support. Also -- and this is of immeasurable merit -- there are hundreds of local Chambers of Commerce which can play a vital supportive role.
It hardly need be said that before embarking upon any program, the Chamber should study and analyze possible courses of action and activities, weighing risks against probable effectiveness and feasibility of each. Considerations of cost, the assurance of financial and other support from members, adequacy of staffing and similar problems will all require the most thoughtful consideration.
The Campus
The assault on the enterprise system was not mounted in a few months. It has gradually evolved over the past two decades, barely perceptible in its origins and benefiting (sic) from a gradualism that provoked little awareness much less any real reaction.
Although origins, sources and causes are complex and interrelated, and obviously difficult to identify without careful qualification, there is reason to believe that the campus is the single most dynamic source. The social science faculties usually include members who are unsympathetic to the enterprise system. They may range from a Herbert Marcuse, Marxist faculty member at the University of California at San Diego, and convinced socialists, to the ambivalent liberal critic who finds more to condemn than to commend. Such faculty members need not be in a majority. They are often personally attractive and magnetic; they are stimulating teachers, and their controversy attracts student following; they are prolific writers and lecturers; they author many of the textbooks, and they exert enormous influence -- far out of proportion to their numbers -- on their colleagues and in the academic world.
Social science faculties (the political scientist, economist, sociologist and many of the historians) tend to be liberally oriented, even when leftists are not present. This is not a criticism per se, as the need for liberal thought is essential to a balanced viewpoint. The difficulty is that "balance" is conspicuous by its absence on many campuses, with relatively few members being of conservatives or moderate persuasion and even the relatively few often being less articulate and aggressive than their crusading colleagues.
This situation extending back many years and with the imbalance gradually worsening, has had an enormous impact on millions of young American students. In an article in Barron's Weekly, seeking an answer to why so many young people are disaffected even to the point of being revolutionaries, it was said: "Because they were taught that way." 10 Or, as noted by columnist Stewart Alsop, writing about his alma mater: "Yale, like every other major college, is graduating scores' of bright young men ... who despise the American political and economic system."
As these "bright young men," from campuses across the country, seek opportunities to change a system which they have been taught to distrust -- if not, indeed "despise" -- they seek employment in the centers of the real power and influence in our country, namely: (i) with the news media, especially television; (ii) in government, as "staffers" and consultants at various levels; (iii) in elective politics; (iv) as lecturers and writers, and (v) on the faculties at various levels of education.
Many do enter the enterprise system -- in business and the professions -- and for the most part they quickly discover the fallacies of what they have been taught. But those who eschew the mainstream of the system often remain in key positions of influence where they mold public opinion and often shape governmental action. In many instances, these "intellectuals" end up in regulatory agencies or governmental departments with large authority over the business system they do not believe in.
If the foregoing analysis is approximately sound, a priority task of business -- and organizations such as the Chamber -- is to address the campus origin of this hostility. Few things are more sanctified in American life than academic freedom. It would be fatal to attack this as a principle. But if academic freedom is to retain the qualities of "openness," "fairness" and "balance" -- which are essential to its intellectual significance -- there is a great opportunity for constructive action. The thrust of such action must be to restore the qualities just mentioned to the academic communities.
What Can Be Done About the Campus
The ultimate responsibility for intellectual integrity on the campus must remain on the administrations and faculties of our colleges and universities. But organizations such as the Chamber can assist and activate constructive change in many ways, including the following:
Staff of Scholars
The Chamber should consider establishing a staff of highly qualified scholars in the social sciences who do believe in the system. It should include several of national reputation whose authorship would be widely respected -- even when disagreed with.
Staff of Speakers
There also should be a staff of speakers of the highest competency. These might include the scholars, and certainly those who speak for the Chamber would have to articulate the product of the scholars.
Speaker's Bureau
In addition to full-time staff personnel, the Chamber should have a Speaker's Bureau which should include the ablest and most effective advocates from the top echelons of American business.
Evaluation of Textbooks
The staff of scholars (or preferably a panel of independent scholars) should evaluate social science textbooks, especially in economics, political science and sociology. This should be a continuing program.
The objective of such evaluation should be oriented toward restoring the balance essential to genuine academic freedom. This would include assurance of fair and factual treatment of our system of government and our enterprise system, its accomplishments, its basic relationship to individual rights and freedoms, and comparisons with the systems of socialism, fascism and communism. Most of the existing textbooks have some sort of comparisons, but many are superficial, biased and unfair.
We have seen the civil rights movement insist on re-writing many of the textbooks in our universities and schools. The labor unions likewise insist that textbooks be fair to the viewpoints of organized labor. Other interested citizens groups have not hesitated to review, analyze and criticize textbooks and teaching materials. In a democratic society, this can be a constructive process and should be regarded as an aid to genuine academic freedom and not as an intrusion upon it.
If the authors, publishers and users of textbooks know that they will be subjected -- honestly, fairly and thoroughly -- to review and critique by eminent scholars who believe in the American system, a return to a more rational balance can be expected.
Equal Time on the Campus
The Chamber should insist upon equal time on the college speaking circuit. The FBI publishes each year a list of speeches made on college campuses by avowed Communists. The number in 1970 exceeded 100. There were, of course, many hundreds of appearances by leftists and ultra liberals who urge the types of viewpoints indicated earlier in this memorandum. There was no corresponding representation of American business, or indeed by individuals or organizations who appeared in support of the American system of government and business.
Every campus has its formal and informal groups which invite speakers. Each law school does the same thing. Many universities and colleges officially sponsor lecture and speaking programs. We all know the inadequacy of the representation of business in the programs.
It will be said that few invitations would be extended to Chamber speakers. 11 This undoubtedly would be true unless the Chamber aggressively insisted upon the right to be heard -- in effect, insisted upon "equal time." University administrators and the great majority of student groups and committees would not welcome being put in the position publicly of refusing a forum to diverse views, indeed, this is the classic excuse for allowing Communists to speak.
The two essential ingredients are (i) to have attractive, articulate and well-informed speakers; and (ii) to exert whatever degree of pressure -- publicly and privately -- may be necessary to assure opportunities to speak. The objective always must be to inform and enlighten, and not merely to propagandize.
Balancing of Faculties
Perhaps the most fundamental problem is the imbalance of many faculties. Correcting this is indeed a long-range and difficult project. Yet, it should be undertaken as a part of an overall program. This would mean the urging of the need for faculty balance upon university administrators and boards of trustees.
The methods to be employed require careful thought, and the obvious pitfalls must be avoided. Improper pressure would be counterproductive. But the basic concepts of balance, fairness and truth are difficult to resist, if properly presented to boards of trustees, by writing and speaking, and by appeals to alumni associations and groups.
This is a long road and not one for the fainthearted. But if pursued with integrity and conviction it could lead to a strengthening of both academic freedom on the campus and of the values which have made America the most productive of all societies.
Graduate Schools of Business
The Chamber should enjoy a particular rapport with the increasingly influential graduate schools of business. Much that has been suggested above applies to such schools.
Should not the Chamber also request specific courses in such schools dealing with the entire scope of the problem addressed by this memorandum? This is now essential training for the executives of the future.
Secondary Education
While the first priority should be at the college level, the trends mentioned above are increasingly evidenced in the high schools. Action programs, tailored to the high schools and similar to those mentioned, should be considered. The implementation thereof could become a major program for local chambers of commerce, although the control and direction -- especially the quality control -- should be retained by the National Chamber.
What Can Be Done About the Public?
Reaching the campus and the secondary schools is vital for the long-term. Reaching the public generally may be more important for the shorter term. The first essential is to establish the staffs of eminent scholars, writers and speakers, who will do the thinking, the analysis, the writing and the speaking. It will also be essential to have staff personnel who are thoroughly familiar with the media, and how most effectively to communicate with the public. Among the more obvious means are the following:
Television
The national television networks should be monitored in the same way that textbooks should be kept under constant surveillance. This applies not merely to so-called educational programs (such as "Selling of the Pentagon"), but to the daily "news analysis" which so often includes the most insidious type of criticism of the enterprise system.12 Whether this criticism results from hostility or economic ignorance, the result is the gradual erosion of confidence in "business" and free enterprise.
This monitoring, to be effective, would require constant examination of the texts of adequate samples of programs. Complaints -- to the media and to the Federal Communications Commission -- should be made promptly and strongly when programs are unfair or inaccurate.
Equal time should be demanded when appropriate. Effort should be made to see that the forum-type programs (the Today Show, Meet the Press, etc.) afford at least as much opportunity for supporters of the American system to participate as these programs do for those who attack it.
Other Media
Radio and the press are also important, and every available means should be employed to challenge and refute unfair attacks, as well as to present the affirmative case through these media.
The Scholarly Journals
It is especially important for the Chamber's "faculty of scholars" to publish. One of the keys to the success of the liberal and leftist faculty members has been their passion for "publication" and "lecturing." A similar passion must exist among the Chamber's scholars.
Incentives might be devised to induce more "publishing" by independent scholars who do believe in the system.
There should be a fairly steady flow of scholarly articles presented to a broad spectrum of magazines and periodicals -- ranging from the popular magazines (Life, Look, Reader's Digest, etc.) to the more intellectual ones (Atlantic, Harper's, Saturday Review, New York, etc.)13 and to the various professional journals.
Books, Paperbacks and Pamphlets
The news stands -- at airports, drugstores, and elsewhere -- are filled with paperbacks and pamphlets advocating everything from revolution to erotic free love. One finds almost no attractive, well-written paperbacks or pamphlets on "our side." It will be difficult to compete with an Eldridge Cleaver or even a Charles Reich for reader attention, but unless the effort is made -- on a large enough scale and with appropriate imagination to assure some success -- this opportunity for educating the public will be irretrievably lost.
Paid Advertisements
Business pays hundreds of millions of dollars to the media for advertisements. Most of this supports specific products; much of it supports institutional image making; and some fraction of it does support the system. But the latter has been more or less tangential, and rarely part of a sustained, major effort to inform and enlighten the American people.
If American business devoted only 10% of its total annual advertising budget to this overall purpose, it would be a statesman-like expenditure.
The Neglected Political Arena
In the final analysis, the payoff -- short-of revolution -- is what government does. Business has been the favorite whipping-boy of many politicians for many years. But the measure of how far this has gone is perhaps best found in the anti-business views now being expressed by several leading candidates for President of the United States.
It is still Marxist doctrine that the "capitalist" countries are controlled by big business. This doctrine, consistently a part of leftist propaganda all over the world, has a wide public following among Americans.
Yet, as every business executive knows, few elements of American society today have as little influence in government as the American businessman, the corporation, or even the millions of corporate stockholders. If one doubts this, let him undertake the role of "lobbyist" for the business point of view before Congressional committees. The same situation obtains in the legislative halls of most states and major cities. One does not exaggerate to say that, in terms of political influence with respect to the course of legislation and government action, the American business executive is truly the "forgotten man."
Current examples of the impotency of business, and of the near-contempt with which businessmen's views are held, are the stampedes by politicians to support almost any legislation related to "consumerism" or to the "environment."
Politicians reflect what they believe to be majority views of their constituents. It is thus evident that most politicians are making the judgment that the public has little sympathy for the businessman or his viewpoint.
The educational programs suggested above would be designed to enlighten public thinking -- not so much about the businessman and his individual role as about the system which he administers, and which provides the goods, services and jobs on which our country depends.
But one should not postpone more direct political action, while awaiting the gradual change in public opinion to be effected through education and information. Business must learn the lesson, long ago learned by labor and other self-interest groups. This is the lesson that political power is necessary; that such power must be assidously (sic) cultivated; and that when necessary, it must be used aggressively and with determination -- without embarrassment and without the reluctance which has been so characteristic of American business.
As unwelcome as it may be to the Chamber, it should consider assuming a broader and more vigorous role in the political arena.
Neglected Opportunity in the Courts
American business and the enterprise system have been affected as much by the courts as by the executive and legislative branches of government. Under our constitutional system, especially with an activist-minded Supreme Court, the judiciary may be the most important instrument for social, economic and political change.
Other organizations and groups, recognizing this, have been far more astute in exploiting judicial action than American business. Perhaps the most active exploiters of the judicial system have been groups ranging in political orientation from "liberal" to the far left.
The American Civil Liberties Union is one example. It initiates or intervenes in scores of cases each year, and it files briefs amicus curiae in the Supreme Court in a number of cases during each term of that court. Labor unions, civil rights groups and now the public interest law firms are extremely active in the judicial arena. Their success, often at business' expense, has not been inconsequential.
This is a vast area of opportunity for the Chamber, if it is willing to undertake the role of spokesman for American business and if, in turn, business is willing to provide the funds.
As with respect to scholars and speakers, the Chamber would need a highly competent staff of lawyers. In special situations it should be authorized to engage, to appear as counsel amicus in the Supreme Court, lawyers of national standing and reputation. The greatest care should be exercised in selecting the cases in which to participate, or the suits to institute. But the opportunity merits the necessary effort.
Neglected Stockholder Power
The average member of the public thinks of "business" as an impersonal corporate entity, owned by the very rich and managed by over-paid executives. There is an almost total failure to appreciate that "business" actually embraces -- in one way or another -- most Americans. Those for whom business provides jobs, constitute a fairly obvious class. But the 20 million stockholders -- most of whom are of modest means -- are the real owners, the real entrepreneurs, the real capitalists under our system. They provide the capital which fuels the economic system which has produced the highest standard of living in all history. Yet, stockholders have been as ineffectual as business executives in promoting a genuine understanding of our system or in exercising political influence.
The question which merits the most thorough examination is how can the weight and influence of stockholders -- 20 million voters -- be mobilized to support (i) an educational program and (ii) a political action program.
Individual corporations are now required to make numerous reports to shareholders. Many corporations also have expensive "news" magazines which go to employees and stockholders. These opportunities to communicate can be used far more effectively as educational media.
The corporation itself must exercise restraint in undertaking political action and must, of course, comply with applicable laws. But is it not feasible -- through an affiliate of the Chamber or otherwise -- to establish a national organization of American stockholders and give it enough muscle to be influential?
A More Aggressive Attitude
Business interests -- especially big business and their national trade organizations -- have tried to maintain low profiles, especially with respect to political action.
As suggested in the Wall Street Journal article, it has been fairly characteristic of the average business executive to be tolerant -- at least in public -- of those who attack his corporation and the system. Very few businessmen or business organizations respond in kind. There has been a disposition to appease; to regard the opposition as willing to compromise, or as likely to fade away in due time.
Business has shunted confrontation politics. Business, quite understandably, has been repelled by the multiplicity of non-negotiable "demands" made constantly by self-interest groups of all kinds.
While neither responsible business interests, nor the United States Chamber of Commerce, would engage in the irresponsible tactics of some pressure groups, it is essential that spokesmen for the enterprise system -- at all levels and at every opportunity -- be far more aggressive than in the past.
There should be no hesitation to attack the Naders, the Marcuses and others who openly seek destruction of the system. There should not be the slightest hesitation to press vigorously in all political arenas for support of the enterprise system. Nor should there be reluctance to penalize politically those who oppose it.
Lessons can be learned from organized labor in this respect. The head of the AFL-CIO may not appeal to businessmen as the most endearing or public-minded of citizens. Yet, over many years the heads of national labor organizations have done what they were paid to do very effectively. They may not have been beloved, but they have been respected -- where it counts the most -- by politicians, on the campus, and among the media.
It is time for American business -- which has demonstrated the greatest capacity in all history to produce and to influence consumer decisions -- to apply their great talents vigorously to the preservation of the system itself.
The Cost
The type of program described above (which includes a broadly based combination of education and political action), if undertaken long term and adequately staffed, would require far more generous financial support from American corporations than the Chamber has ever received in the past. High level management participation in Chamber affairs also would be required.
The staff of the Chamber would have to be significantly increased, with the highest quality established and maintained. Salaries would have to be at levels fully comparable to those paid key business executives and the most prestigious faculty members. Professionals of the great skill in advertising and in working with the media, speakers, lawyers and other specialists would have to be recruited.
It is possible that the organization of the Chamber itself would benefit from restructuring. For example, as suggested by union experience, the office of President of the Chamber might well be a full-time career position. To assure maximum effectiveness and continuity, the chief executive officer of the Chamber should not be changed each year. The functions now largely performed by the President could be transferred to a Chairman of the Board, annually elected by the membership. The Board, of course, would continue to exercise policy control.
Quality Control is Essential
Essential ingredients of the entire program must be responsibility and "quality control." The publications, the articles, the speeches, the media programs, the advertising, the briefs filed in courts, and the appearances before legislative committees -- all must meet the most exacting standards of accuracy and professional excellence. They must merit respect for their level of public responsibility and scholarship, whether one agrees with the viewpoints expressed or not.
Relationship to Freedom
The threat to the enterprise system is not merely a matter of economics. It also is a threat to individual freedom.
It is this great truth -- now so submerged by the rhetoric of the New Left and of many liberals -- that must be re-affirmed if this program is to be meaningful.
There seems to be little awareness that the only alternatives to free enterprise are varying degrees of bureaucratic regulation of individual freedom -- ranging from that under moderate socialism to the iron heel of the leftist or rightist dictatorship.
We in America already have moved very far indeed toward some aspects of state socialism, as the needs and complexities of a vast urban society require types of regulation and control that were quite unnecessary in earlier times. In some areas, such regulation and control already have seriously impaired the freedom of both business and labor, and indeed of the public generally. But most of the essential freedoms remain: private ownership, private profit, labor unions, collective bargaining, consumer choice, and a market economy in which competition largely determines price, quality and variety of the goods and services provided the consumer.
In addition to the ideological attack on the system itself (discussed in this memorandum), its essentials also are threatened by inequitable taxation, and -- more recently -- by an inflation which has seemed uncontrollable.14 But whatever the causes of diminishing economic freedom may be, the truth is that freedom as a concept is indivisible. As the experience of the socialist and totalitarian states demonstrates, the contraction and denial of economic freedom is followed inevitably by governmental restrictions on other cherished rights. It is this message, above all others, that must be carried home to the American people.
Conclusion
It hardly need be said that the views expressed above are tentative and suggestive. The first step should be a thorough study. But this would be an exercise in futility unless the Board of Directors of the Chamber accepts the fundamental premise of this paper, namely, that business and the enterprise system are in deep trouble, and the hour is late.
Footnotes
1 . Variously called: the "free enterprise system," "capitalism," and the "profit system." The American political system of democracy under the rule of law is also under attack, often by the same individuals and organizations who seek to undermine the enterprise system.
2 . Richmond News Leader, June 8, 1970. Column of William F. Buckley, Jr.
3 . N.Y. Times Service article, reprinted Richmond Times-Dispatch, May 17, 1971.
4 . Stewart Alsop, Yale and the Deadly Danger, Newsweek, May 18. 1970.
5 . Editorial, Richmond Times-Dispatch, July 7, 1971.
6 . Dr. Milton Friedman, Prof. of Economics, U. of Chicago, writing a foreword to Dr. Arthur A. Shenfield's Rockford College lectures entitled "The Ideological War Against Western Society," copyrighted 1970 by Rockford College.
7 . Fortune. May, 1971, p. 145. This Fortune analysis of the Nader influence includes a reference to Nader's visit to a college where he was paid a lecture fee of $2,500 for "denouncing America's big corporations in venomous language . . . bringing (rousing and spontaneous) bursts of applause" when he was asked when he planned to run for President.
8 . The Washington Post, Column of William Raspberry, June 28, 1971.
9 . Jeffrey St. John, The Wall Street Journal, May 21, 1971.
* . Italic emphasis added by Mr. Powell.
10 . Barron's National Business and Financial Weekly, "The Total Break with America, The Fifth Annual Conference of Socialist Scholars," Sept. 15, 1969.
11 . On many campuses freedom of speech has been denied to all who express moderate or conservative viewpoints.
12 . It has been estimated that the evening half-hour news programs of the networks reach daily some 50,000,000 Americans.
13 . One illustration of the type of article which should not go unanswered appeared in the popular "The New York" of July 19, 1971. This was entitled "A Populist Manifesto" by ultra liberal Jack Newfield -- who argued that "the root need in our country is 'to redistribute wealth'."
14 . The recent "freeze" of prices and wages may well be justified by the current inflationary crisis. But if imposed as a permanent measure the enterprise system will have sustained a near fatal blow.
Etc
Society
Groupthink : Two Party System as Polyarchy : Corruption of Regulators : Bureaucracies : Understanding Micromanagers and Control Freaks : Toxic Managers : Harvard Mafia : Diplomatic Communication : Surviving a Bad Performance Review : Insufficient Retirement Funds as Immanent Problem of Neoliberal Regime : PseudoScience : Who Rules America : Neoliberalism : The Iron Law of Oligarchy : Libertarian Philosophy
Quotes
War and Peace : Skeptical Finance : John Kenneth Galbraith :Talleyrand : Oscar Wilde : Otto Von Bismarck : Keynes : George Carlin : Skeptics : Propaganda : SE quotes : Language Design and Programming Quotes : Random IT-related quotes : Somerset Maugham : Marcus Aurelius : Kurt Vonnegut : Eric Hoffer : Winston Churchill : Napoleon Bonaparte : Ambrose Bierce : Bernard Shaw : Mark Twain Quotes
Bulletin:
Vol 25, No.12 (December, 2013) Rational Fools vs. Efficient Crooks The efficient markets hypothesis : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2013 : Unemployment Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 23, No.10 (October, 2011) An observation about corporate security departments : Slightly Skeptical Euromaydan Chronicles, June 2014 : Greenspan legacy bulletin, 2008 : Vol 25, No.10 (October, 2013) Cryptolocker Trojan (Win32/Crilock.A) : Vol 25, No.08 (August, 2013) Cloud providers as intelligence collection hubs : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : Inequality Bulletin, 2009 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Copyleft Problems Bulletin, 2004 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Energy Bulletin, 2010 : Malware Protection Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 26, No.1 (January, 2013) Object-Oriented Cult : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2011 : Vol 23, No.11 (November, 2011) Softpanorama classification of sysadmin horror stories : Vol 25, No.05 (May, 2013) Corporate bullshit as a communication method : Vol 25, No.06 (June, 2013) A Note on the Relationship of Brooks Law and Conway Law
History:
Fifty glorious years (1950-2000): the triumph of the US computer engineering : Donald Knuth : TAoCP and its Influence of Computer Science : Richard Stallman : Linus Torvalds : Larry Wall : John K. Ousterhout : CTSS : Multix OS Unix History : Unix shell history : VI editor : History of pipes concept : Solaris : MS DOS : Programming Languages History : PL/1 : Simula 67 : C : History of GCC development : Scripting Languages : Perl history : OS History : Mail : DNS : SSH : CPU Instruction Sets : SPARC systems 1987-2006 : Norton Commander : Norton Utilities : Norton Ghost : Frontpage history : Malware Defense History : GNU Screen : OSS early history
Classic books:
The Peter Principle : Parkinson Law : 1984 : The Mythical Man-Month : How to Solve It by George Polya : The Art of Computer Programming : The Elements of Programming Style : The Unix Hater’s Handbook : The Jargon file : The True Believer : Programming Pearls : The Good Soldier Svejk : The Power Elite
Most popular humor pages:
Manifest of the Softpanorama IT Slacker Society : Ten Commandments of the IT Slackers Society : Computer Humor Collection : BSD Logo Story : The Cuckoo's Egg : IT Slang : C++ Humor : ARE YOU A BBS ADDICT? : The Perl Purity Test : Object oriented programmers of all nations : Financial Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : The Most Comprehensive Collection of Editor-related Humor : Programming Language Humor : Goldman Sachs related humor : Greenspan humor : C Humor : Scripting Humor : Real Programmers Humor : Web Humor : GPL-related Humor : OFM Humor : Politically Incorrect Humor : IDS Humor : "Linux Sucks" Humor : Russian Musical Humor : Best Russian Programmer Humor : Microsoft plans to buy Catholic Church : Richard Stallman Related Humor : Admin Humor : Perl-related Humor : Linus Torvalds Related humor : PseudoScience Related Humor : Networking Humor : Shell Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2012 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2013 : Java Humor : Software Engineering Humor : Sun Solaris Related Humor : Education Humor : IBM Humor : Assembler-related Humor : VIM Humor : Computer Viruses Humor : Bright tomorrow is rescheduled to a day after tomorrow : Classic Computer Humor
The Last but not Least Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt. Ph.D
Copyright © 1996-2021 by Softpanorama Society. www.softpanorama.org was initially created as a service to the (now defunct) UN Sustainable Development Networking Programme (SDNP) without any remuneration. This document is an industrial compilation designed and created exclusively for educational use and is distributed under the Softpanorama Content License. Original materials copyright belong to respective owners. Quotes are made for educational purposes only in compliance with the fair use doctrine.
FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.
This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free) site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...
You can use PayPal to to buy a cup of coffee for authors of this site Disclaimer:
The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or referenced source) and are not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the Softpanorama society. We do not warrant the correctness of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose. The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without Javascript.
Last modified: September 12, 2017
