WHY “SUPERCAPITALISM” WILL NOT BE A POPULAR BOOK

Robert Reich, currently professor of Public Policy at the University of California, Berkeley has written another book. This one is titled Supercapitalism: The Transformation of Business Democracy and Everyday Life.

Supercapitalism is an important book and should be widely read. In particular, it should be read by Bacon’s Rebellion columnists and those who post and comment on Bacons Rebellion Blog. Why? Because the book addresses an issue central to any discussion of economic, social and physical ramifications of the road ahead.

Supercapitalism will not a ‘best seller’ or a favorite of the Bacon’s Rebellion Corps for reasons we outline below.

Reich has a simple message:

Consumers and investors in the US of A – and the First World in general – are far better off than individuals and Households have been in any society in history. Most have done especially well consuming and some have done exceedingly well financially over the last 3-plus decades.

On the other hand, individuals in their role as citizens have had a very difficult time over this same time period. Further, the quality and effectiveness of the democratic governance structure under which they live has eroded badly.

Reich has the data to back up these assertions. As it turns out, when one strips away the self-serving puffery and pandering rhetoric these realities are broadly agreed to across academic, political and economic spectra.

Reich does a splendid job of providing an economic overview of the US of A since the Civil War as he outlines how citizens got to the post WW II era which he calls “The Almost Golden Age.” Reich then describes how and why that era morphed after 1973 into what he calls “supercapitalism.”

Reich dismantles a number of illusions concerning why some individuals and some ideologies are credited with “economic miracles” along the way. These changes were underway long before the hero jumped on the bandwagon. He also put in their place a number of ogres like “greed.

[We will be adding three new columns to THE ESTATES MATRIX (V 2.0) – for the years 1870, 1920 and 1973 – that reflect some of his important insights. Yes, one of the reasons we like Supercapitalism is that it tracks so well with THE ESTATES MATRIX.]

To his credit, beyond documenting reality, Reich offers a simple “solution” to a key driver of economic and democracy dysfunction. His suggestion makes eminent good sense. Reich also provides a number of ideas which may make it into the platform of a presidential candidate. This is a startling accomplishment for a book dealing with a topic as complex as the future of democracy and market economies.

With this much going for it, why is Supercapitalism not on the way up the ‘best seller’ list?

One reason that a book that explores a subject of this nature may be unpopular is that it is long and hard to understand. That is not the problem with Reich’s book. It is only 223 pages plus end notes and index, even with large print and generous line spacing. What is more, if succinctly written, Reich’s core ideas could be well expressed in 50 pages or less. Of course, writing an essay / working paper would not meet the criteria for a “book” and would not make the publisher or the author as much money. This fact presents an ironic twist of Reich’s basic thesis on what is wrong with capitalism and democracy.

Reich makes simple, straight forward points and expresses them well. He then goes on to cite example after example that pound home the lesson from each of six chapters. Having this wealth of supporting data is a luxury afforded to those who dwell in ivy towers and have grad students and post docs to gather material and research budgets for processing, digesting and editing that material.

So what are the problems with Supercapitalism if it is not that it is long or hard to understand?

Best selling books either make readers feel good or they identify bad guys.

There is not much to feel good about from a clear eyed review of the economic, social and physical trajectory of contemporary society.

Villains sell books because they provide some thing or some one to get mad at.

There being no basis for a feel-good story line, the primary problem with the Supercapitalism becomes the fact that Reich identifies no villain.

In Supercapitalism there are no villains – unless one looks in the mirror. Pogo’s Epiphany applied to the state of the economy and democracy will not sell books.

Reich points out with chilling clarity the conflict within individuals between their roles as consumers and investors and their role as citizens. He calls this conflict “being of two minds.”

The villain vacuum compounds a reality that Tony Downs – the denizen of Real Estate Research and later The Brookings Institution – liked to spotlight in the context of Mobility and Access. Tony pointed out that:

In a democracy, it is very hard to get those who benefit individually from a course of action to support changes which will benefit society-as-a-whole but will limit or eliminate their own individual advantage or benefit.

We explore this issue in depth in The Shape of the Future in the context of “What is good for one is not good for all.” An urban dwelling on a five or 10 acre lot is the human settlement pattern poster child of this axiom. In the book this reality is termed “The Fallacy of Composition.” That is the term Robert Samuelson used to describe this core problem with capitalism and democracy.

[Those who want to use the “find” utility of the Adobe Reader to search The Shape of the Future for the relevant passages, key in “The Fallacy of Composition.”]

The second problem with Supercapitalism’s lack of popularity is that there will be those who find this book distasteful, not because of what the book actually says but, because of who wrote it. Zealots knowing that Reich is a self-declared “liberal” who taught at Harvard, served as Labor Secretary in the Clinton administration and is a backer of Barack Obama are likely to believe they must reject out of hand whatever Reich might have to say.

It would appear however, if those who occupy any station along the many and varied political / ideological continua that intersect the Economic Sphere are honest with themselves they would agree with almost everything that Reich says in this book.

OK, “some” can find “problems” with any statement as the Blogisphere and this Blog document. Let us just say contrarians would find it hard to locate evidence that refutes Reich’s key observations.

The confounding reality for the ideologues – and this is the same issue that arises with 12 ½ Percenters vis a vis strategies to evolve functional human settlement patterns – if they agree with Reich, they undermine many of the positions they have taken in the past with respect to economic, social and physical activities.

If Supercapitalism starts to move up the best seller lists, it will be attacked in MainStream Media by editors and talking heads because the book challenges the fundamental idea of Mass OverConsumption. Never mind that if democracies with market economies are to be preserved, the trajectory of the Mass OverConsumption-driven economy and society must be changed.

[See APPENDIX ONE: “Disorienting ‘News’ On Citizen Well Being” APPENDIX ONE in “GOOD NEWS: What MainStream Media Is, and Is Not, Telling Us.” [Link in 5 March 2008 Jim Bacon post “Good News, Bad Reporting” on this Blog.]

Are there shortcomings in Reich’s book?

Yes, three stand out.

First there is the core malady of Geographic Illiteracy. This is especially problematic in Reich’s discussion of large public corporations that have direct impact on creating dysfunctional human settlement patterns – Wal*Mart for example. See “Learning From Big Boxes, PART III of THE PROBLEM WITH CARS. [Forthcoming]

Reich makes no reference to, or connection between, Wal*Mart actions and dysfunctional human settlement patterns. What Reich’s ideas desperately need is a New Urban Region Conceptual Framework – or some other comprehensive distribution-of-human-activity conceptual framework – that will facilitate an understanding of the economic and social impacts of the actions that he portrays and the solutions that he outlines.

The second short coming with the Reich book also makes it harder than it needs to be to get across the importance of the core message of Supercapitalism. Reich does not have an overarching conceptual framework for the major organizing forces of society.

Chapter Six (“A Citizen’s Guide to Supercapitalism”) cries out for a clear way to distinguish the differences between the interests of Enterprises (the Second Estate) and citizens (the Fourth Estate).

Reich may or may not agree with the context established for Agencies, Enterprises, Institutions and Citizens / Households in THE ESTATE MATRIX. However, if he does not, then he needs to come up with an alternative because without a conceptual framework for discussing these issues it is easy to fall into a wasteland of babble with every reader applying their own definition in the best tradition of Humpty Dumpty.

The third and final shortcoming is that Reich suggests that a comprehensive “solution” to evolving a functional democracy in the 21st century is possible without a Fundamental Change in governance structure. His one simple idea about the nature of corporations is a great start, but it is just a start.

Were the book rewritten it could be easily absorbed in an hour. But the need for a conceptual framework with consistent vocabulary to spotlight the importance of human settlement patterns and the need for something like THE ESTATES MATRIX to illustrate the difference between the interests of citizens from the interests / driving forces of Enterprises (and in interests / driving forces of Agencies and Institutions) would be critical to making his arguments so powerful that they could not be ignored, even if unpopular.

Readers of this brief review will note that we did not go into detail on the conflict between individuals as consumers and investors and individuals as citizens. We also did not divulge the clear, elegant threshold solution Reich presents for a key driver of dysfunction or the specific ideas that may end up in Barack Obama’s platform.

Why?

It would be a good idea for you to read Supercapitalism yourself.

EMR


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

  1. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Ed,
    I have been reading the guy for years, including this book.
    With all due respect, please don’t give us BR columnists reading “assignments.” No one made you the dean of columnists. We are all equals here.

    Thanks.
    Peter Galuszka

  2. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Peter Galuszka:

    You might give consideration to lightening up a bit.

    If you have already read the book, it is not an assignment that you have to worry about.

    You seem to be under a lot of pressure and are having a hard time adjusting to reality.

    Some time ago you claimed that you did not write a column that blasted passenger rail service but in fact you did. It was titled “Forget Passenger Rail” and ended with this sentence “As for passenger rail, forget it.” Published in December.

    Today on this blog you blasted Larry Gross because you apparently misread what he had written. He was not commenting on your vast experience, he was throwing rocks at EMR.

    You do not seem to have a good word for anyone anymore.

    In fact, you do not seem to be enjoying life at all.

    Here is a suggestion, since you take suggestions to well:

    Go out and get a nice, well paying job in “Journalism.” You know the kind that were available in 1974 with junior high-school summer school training in the craft (a quote from you) and an Ivy League education.

    OR

    You can start reading with more care and try to come to understand why, in spite of all your “experience,” you still do not “get it.”

    “So, why do I need a GLOSSARY to understand all of this?”

    Because you do not understand what is going on around you and your ignorance is not making you happy.

    A former friend

  3. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Guys, This dialogue is getting a bit too personal for my taste. I’m not pointing fingers at anyone or taking sides, I’m just getting uncomfortable with the tenor of some remarks — not just in this instance but remarks in other posts involving other people. Remember, the cardinal rule of Bacon’s Rebellion is to criticize the argument, not the person.

    If bloggers can’t abide by that rule, I will start deleting their comments.

  4. James Atticus Bowden Avatar
    James Atticus Bowden

    I’ll order the book and read it. I’ve set some higher reading goals this year – and am meeting them. But, I’ll get this and move it up in the que.

    Have a great vacation. I hope to see that place some day.

  5. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Why “supercapitalism” won’t be a popular book.

    EMR recommended it.

    RH

  6. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    I plan on buying and reading but I’ve seen him interviewed on TV (CNBC) about his book…

    .. and my impression (which may change after reading the book)…

    .. is that the “market economy” is no longer an American Market Economy and instead is a World Market Economy run by capitalists who have more allegiance to Capitalism than to particular countries

    .. and that workers are workers… wherever you can find them in the desired quantity with the required knowledge and skills.

    But as usual.. I don’t see some of the same things that EMR sees.

    WalMart IS the perfect model of Supercapitalism.

    It has a wide array of products produced around the world – and it has stores around the world selling those products as inexpensively as they can and because of the way they run their operation – at a pretty competitive prices even against local competition.

    So – as a local, you can go the 9 different stores each one having some item that you need – or you can go to a WalMart – to get your prescription, your motor oil and your celery – as well as fresh bread and LCD TVs.

    How much of this we buy or do not buy does not in and of itself indicate over-consumption.

    People can go to Walmart and get stuff and NOT overconsume just by virtue of the fact that they shop at Walmart.

    Can they get more for their money?

    Yes – but that’s not overconsumption at all.

    and make no mistake – when you buy lobster at WalMart or at a local seafood store.

    You are NOT buying local food and you ARE buying something that would not be available to you without a fairly extensive mobility to move those products fast AND at a reasonable price.

    Unless I misunderstand Mr. Reich, he is NOT advocating a return to a world where folks live in self-contained communities.. at all.

    It’s true the world runs on fossil fuels right now.. but it’s also true that from a technology point of view that BIG ships CAN and do run on small nuke reactors AND coal so we could (and will some day) run out of oil… but I just don’t ever see us returning to a world where people and goods mobility is shrunk back to levels we saw prior to modern – supercapitalistic economies.

    I see the essence as – fossil fuels have spawned our modern economies.

    The eventual exhaustion of fossil fuels will not lead to an exhaustion of energy or technologies to use energy in different forms than fossil fuels.

    and as long as that is the case, I just cannot conceive of voluntary or mandatory shrinkage of mobility or economies that depend on mobility.

  7. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    James Atticus Bowden:

    Hope Supercapitalism meets your higher reading goals!

    Since you and I look at some things (but NOT old growth forests) differently, I will look forward to your observations.

    Larry Gross:

    “I plan on buying and reading but I’ve seen him interviewed on TV (CNBC) about his book…”

    Since CNBC is part of MainStream Media I can only imagine the spin they gave it.

    “.. and my impression (which may change after reading the book)…

    “.. is that the “market economy” is no longer an American Market Economy and instead is a World Market Economy run by capitalists who have more allegiance to Capitalism than to particular countries.”

    True

    “.. and that workers are workers… wherever you can find them in the desired quantity with the required knowledge and skills.”

    You will recall that we pointed out three shortcomings and one is Geographic Illiteracy. In this case the need to understand the impact of full fair allocation of the cost…

    “But as usual.. I don’t see some of the same things that EMR sees.”

    “WalMart IS the perfect model of Supercapitalism.”

    Yes and Reich and I agree too, no difference there.

    “It has a wide array of products produced around the world – and it has stores around the world selling those products as inexpensively as they can and because of the way they run their operation – at a pretty competitive prices even against local competition.”

    Our review was intended to run with PART III of THE PROBLEM WITH CARS but you will have to wait until Jim Bacon get back to see why this may not be true.

    “So – as a local, you can go the 9 different stores each one having some item that you need – or you can go to a WalMart – to get your prescription, your motor oil and your celery – as well as fresh bread and LCD TVs.”

    See above note.

    “How much of this we buy or do not buy does not in and of itself indicate over-consumption.”

    True, it is where you buy it that makes the difference as we point out in PART III “Learning from the Big Box.”

    “People can go to Walmart and get stuff and NOT overconsume just by virtue of the fact that they shop at Walmart.”

    True.

    “Can they get more for their money?”

    Ah, that is the question as we point out in “Learning from the Big Box.”

    “Yes – but that’s not overconsumption at all.

    The answer is actually No – but it is still not Mass OverConsumtion per se as you point out.

    “and make no mistake – when you buy lobster at WalMart or at a local seafood store.”

    “You are NOT buying local food and you ARE buying something that would not be available to you without a fairly extensive mobility to move those products fast AND at a reasonable price.”

    Agreed, and your point is?

    “Unless I misunderstand Mr. Reich, he is NOT advocating a return to a world where folks live in self-contained” communities.. at all.”

    I think if you read our review with more care you will find Reich does not address settlement pattern issues at all. That is a problem with his book, not a statement about the relevance of Balanced Communities in sustainable New Urban Regions.

    “It’s true the world runs on fossil fuels right now.. but it’s also true that from a technology point of view that BIG ships CAN and do run on small nuke reactors AND coal so we could (and will some day) run out of oil… but I just don’t ever see us returning to a world where people and goods mobility is shrunk back to levels we saw prior to modern – supercapitalistic economies.”

    All depends on cost and the allocation of costs.

    “I see the essence as – fossil fuels have spawned our modern economies.”

    True.

    “The eventual exhaustion of fossil fuels will not lead to an exhaustion of energy or technologies to use energy in different forms than fossil fuels.”

    Depends on cost AND on the other half of what Reich and I are talking about: democracy.

    Recall the Sao Paulo Mobility and Access equation. How long before Brazil has a leader like Chavez if the wealth gap continues to grow?

    “and as long as that is the case, I just cannot conceive of voluntary or mandatory shrinkage of mobility or economies that depend on mobility.”

    Just what Hoover said about the Roaring 20s.

    See “Good News, Bad Reporting.”

    EMR

  8. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    EMR,
    Just to remind you, we are ALL equals here and personal insults really don’t bring much to the party.
    As far as my rail column last year, please let me try to explain it to you again. I back passenger out the wha zoo. I really do. Love it. But when I heard the NS CEO, I realized that he was right that there is not the public will to back the massive expenditures it would take to build the infrastructure that a lot of land use planners and assorted visionaries want. That was the point I was trying to make: great idea, bad political climate.
    If Virginia can’t even fund its road needs and comes up with unconstitutional tax authorities (which anyone could have foreseen), then how, pray tell, are they going to back funding massive rail infrastructure? You keep coming back with your admittedly interesting but still politically questionable theories about moving settlement patterns closer to the core of cities. Sounds great, but given the libertarian and conservative nature of Virginia politics, how the hell are you going to do that without imposing some kind of state-sanctioned decree dictating the kinds of restrictions and policies you advocate?
    Hate to say it, EMR, but when it comes to this stuff, I actually start liking the ideas of James Atticus Bowden and Lord help me for that!

    Peter Galuszka
    PS: Love passnger rail, really do.

  9. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Wait a minute, EMR,
    I’m not done with you yet. You really need to watch the assumptions you make in your columns such as this one: “If Supercapitalism starts to move up the best seller lists, it will be attacked in MainStream Media by editors and talking heads because the book challenges the fundamental idea of Mass OverConsumption.”

    Consider this book review by the New York Times, the dean of the MSM: ” A grand debunking of the conventional wisdom . . . the main thrust of Reich’s argument is right on target . . Reich documents in lurid detail the explosive growth of corporate lobbying expenditures and campaign contributions since the 1970s.”
    -The New York Times Book Review

    Also, the book came out more than six months ago. That’s a life time ago in commercial publishing.

    Peter Galuszka

  10. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    At 8:51 AM Peter Galuszka said:

    “Wait a minute, EMR,
    I’m not done with you yet.”

    OK, shoot.

    “You really need to watch the assumptions you make in your columns such as this one: “If Supercapitalism starts to move up the best seller lists, it will be attacked in MainStream Media by editors and talking heads because the book challenges the fundamental idea of Mass OverConsumption.”

    Yes, that is what I said.

    “Consider this book review by the New York Times, the dean of the MSM: ” A grand debunking of the conventional wisdom . . . the main thrust of Reich’s argument is right on target . . Reich documents in lurid detail the explosive growth of corporate lobbying expenditures and campaign contributions since the 1970s.

    -The New York Time Book Review”

    Yes, So?

    Please reread what I said. I did not say there would be no favorable reviews in MainStream Media, I said “If it starts to move up the best seller list…”

    Book reviewers are paid to favorably review books, if they knock everything they lose their jobs.

    But if a book starts to get popular, then other factors kick in.

    “Also, the book came out more than six months ago. That’s a life time ago in commercial publishing.”

    In general that is true but “Guns Germs and Steel” came out in 1997 and “The Tipping Point” in 2000 and both were back on the Best Seller lists in the last 6 months.

    I stand by my statement.

    Further, perhaps if you read what I write with more care, you would find you agree with much more of what I say.

    EMR

    Peter Galuszka

  11. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    Oops fogot one sentence:

    I would put “Supercapitalism” on the same level as “Guns, Germs …”, “Collapse,” “The Tipping Point” and “Blink” on citizens must read list.

    EMR

  12. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    Peter G:

    OK, since you brought it up:

    A while back you said:

    “EMR,

    “As far as my rail column last year, please let me try to explain it to you again.”

    If you check, I did not raise your rail column again, an Anon did that.

    The column is there for all to read and come to their own conclusion.

    “I back passenger out the wha zoo. I really do. Love it.”

    “PS: Love passnger rail, really do.”

    If you really love rail then take the Richard Register pledge:

    “This is the last car I will ever buy”

    Then start taking actions to create a satisfying life style without a car.

    If you and others do not do that, then there will never be …

    “… the public will to back the massive expenditures it would take to build the infrastructure that a lot of land use planners and assorted visionaries want.”

    My roll is to point out that these expenditures (massive or not) will be far less than the alternative. No matter how much is spent, Mobility and Access via the Autonomobile is not possible.

    “That was the point I was trying to make: great idea, bad political climate.”

    Forgive me, this is the first time I understood that was your point. Perhaps it should have been in your “Forget Passenger Rail” Column.

    Hacking at those who are trying to change the political climate is not a good way to get what you say you love.

    “If Virginia can’t even fund its road needs and comes up with unconstitutional tax authorities (which anyone could have foreseen), then how, pray tell, are they going to back funding massive rail infrastructure?”

    As noted above, “the road needs” are a bottomless pit given a Mass OverConsumptive society and reliace on Autonomobiles.

    “You keep coming back with your admittedly interesting but still politically questionable theories about moving settlement patterns closer to the core of cities.”

    Show me one place I have talked about “the core of cities.”

    “Sounds great, but given the libertarian and conservative nature of Virginia politics, how the hell are you going to do that without imposing some kind of state-sanctioned decree dictating the kinds of restrictions and policies you advocate?”

    By fairly allocating costs and enhancing democracy, the later of which Reich has made quite clear in his book.

    Virginian’s are not dumb, they have just had self-serving leaders who have perfected a system to keep themselves in power.

    Join the movement to support Fundamental Change.

    EMR

  13. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    EMR,
    No way in hell am I going to take the Richard Register pledge.
    If I did, my teenaged daughters would tie my upside down on the nearest tree limb and disembowel me.

    Peter Galuszka

  14. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    At 1:01 Peter G said — twice for emphasis:

    “EMR,

    “No way in hell am I going to take the Richard Register pledge.

    “If I did, my teenaged daughters would tie my upside down on the nearest tree limb and disembowel me.”

    Ah Ha! So it is not just the Libertarians and the Conservatives that are the problem.

    Now you see why I say it may take 40 years and has to start in the elementry schools.

    Actually as the Cubans and the Hatians have shown, you can keep old cars on the road for decades.

    May not be a bad pledge to take.

    But even if you do not take the pledge, lets work together for Fundamental Change, not bash those who are trying to get the percentage of those who think it would be a good idea from 5% to 10%.

    EMR

  15. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    ” but it’s also true that from a technology point of view that BIG ships CAN and do run on small nuke reactors AND coal so we could (and will some day) run out of oil..”

    At one time in my past, I created an economic computer model that would predict when a return to sail powered ships was possible.

    Last month a major ship mad its first passage assited by a kite like sail. The sail cut fuel consumption by an estimated 15%.

    RH

  16. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “Actually as the Cubans and the Hatians have shown, you can keep old cars on the road for decades.”

    What do you mean the Haitians and Cubans?

    My oldest farm truck was built in 1980. My newest in 1990.

    RH

  17. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “EMR,
    Just to remind you, we are ALL equals here and personal insults really don’t bring much to the party.”

    Agreed.

    EMR seems to think he has free license in this regard. I think a little peer presure is in order.

    RH

  18. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “You keep coming back with your admittedly interesting but still politically questionable theories about moving settlement patterns closer to the core of cities.”

    Show me one place I have talked about “the core of cities.”

    If this is a mistake, Peter isn’t the only one to make it.

    You should make your ideas more clear, and a lot less obtuse.

    Then you might get from 1% to 2%. It’s not 5% to 10%, but then,

    humility is agreat start.

    RH

Leave a Reply