Industry and the State

My wife asked me today whether I believed in state run enterprise/industry. My response was in the negative. However, in the context of today's supranational corporations running roughshod over communities and natural resources, this may not seem the most sensible response at first sight.

Thing is, we've never witnessed the sort of unprecedented and phenomenal innovation that's taken place in the last couple of centuries. This is due in no small part to having a foundation which allows for free enterprise. This is capitalism's forte - the freeing up of capital and human resources, within a sufficient context of liberty, to unleash the creative ingenuity at the heart of human potential. "Free" markets (in quotations because the concept has never really been applied according to definition) has resulted in countless innovations.

On the other hand, do I think industries and companies in the West have a little too much leeway in carving out resources and market share? Yes. Do I think government could do a better job? Not really. However, although the free market construct and the institutions derived in its name have led to some spectacular progress and growth, the same cannot be said with respect to the protection of people, communities, and resources. This is completely understandable. The corporation, the principle actor here, is not built this way. The corporate entity is single minded in purpose - keep input costs low and increase growth as much as possible through innovation and other means. Unfortunately, this leaves no opportunity for the consideration of the human interest, except in so far as it improves innovation and growth. That's no fault of the corporation, that's just the way it is.

What's the human interest? Keeping our rivers clean, keeping neighborhoods safe and livable, keeping some green space, and whatever else different people in different areas of the world think is important to them. This is government's forte. The ability to exert sovereign control over an area and to exert the will of people (whether these 'people' are tyrants, oligarchs, democrats, republicans, or bona-fide democratically elected representatives is another matter). In other words, to balance and protect the perceived needs and desires of people and societies with the free enterprises that provide for innovation and economic growth. Granted, there's a lot of room for improvement in the way in which people are chosen/determined to exert the sovereign control of a society over itself. But I'll leave that for another time.

As an example, consider police and fire forces around the world. It is pretty much agreed, these services are best not left to free enterprise. These services are seen as a necessary part of livable societies, and so best left in the hands of government. The same could be argued for the regulation of natural resources, the inputs utilized by many free enterprises, or the regulation of infrastructure in order to ensure it meets the needs of the communities for which it is being built.

So I'm all for liberty and free enterprise. However, I see this liberty as more than the freedom to innovate and grow exponentially. I see it as the freedom not only to grow and innovate, but to sustain ourselves for the future, protect our communities, and ensure a safe place for one another.