9: Fourth in a Series
Gordon Coggins
“Why, you’re just a bunch of socialists,” said Finnolly Servus. The statement seemed to clear his mind.
“What do you mean by ‘socialist’?” asked May, her cool blue eyes looking strangely kind.
Finnolly hesitated. Yes, what did he mean by “socialist”?
“I think he means anyone who doesn’t believe what he happens to believe at any given time,” said Fay.
If one of the men had said it, Finnolly would have hardened. Instead, he smiled at Fay. Then he looked around the group. They were all looking at him. “Just a bunch” did not do them justice. He had heard the accountant’s clear and cogent presentation on national, and international, finance. He had talked with Bill Sparks and respected his frankness and his grasp of history. The journalist’s columns sometimes rubbed him the wrong way, but in person she was, well, she was certainly well informed. Even the students displayed a quick intelligent grasp of the topic being discussed, though Finnolly could not have put it in those words.
He sensed an unusual opportunity. He had experienced that sense many times before; it had always been a “buy” opportunity, to make a few bucks on an investment. This, however, felt like another kind of opportunity – to be an “insider” of a different society. He hesitated. Then he jumped. “I don’t know what I meant. You tell me.”
As he looked around the group, he saw an unexpected sympathy in each face. At last they deferred to the academician.
“Socialism,” said Prof. Sparks, “I would distinguish from ‘social democracy.’ I don’t think any of us here would claim to be socialists, but we would probably all answer the call for social democrats.”
Finnolly Servus felt somewhat relieved. He remained attentive.
“Socialism,” Sparks went on, “is what the Soviets developed after the 1917 revolution. Factories, farms, and other private properties were taken over by citizen committees under the direction of the government. So we define socialism as government ownership of all the means of production. However, it does imply some sort of people’s political power, democracy, in other words. When the democracy dies, as it did in the Soviet Union, you have something different from socialism.”
“In the Stalin era the Soviets gave socialism a bad name,” said May.
“And for a lot of people who don’t know history, the bad name has stuck. For them socialism equals Stalinist dictatorship,” added the accountant. “Of course, it’s also a convenient excuse to avoid critical thinking.” He did not look at Finnolly Servus as he made that remark.
“Socialism is the antithesis of capitalism, however,” continued Sparks. “Capitalism rightly defined, that is. A modern dictionary calls capitalism an economic system in which wealth and political power are concentrated in the hands of a few. The United States, for example, at the present time is more capitalistic than it has been since before the sinking of the Titanic. I recently referred to the States and Canada as, ‘former’ democracies.”
Fay grinned. May sighed.
“So what is social democracy?” asked Finnolly.
“Between capitalism, which is anti-democratic, and socialism, which is highly democratic, we find social democracy. The social democrat wants political power to be widely distributed, by free and honest election of officials, for instance. He wants personal rights protected, by an independent and honest judicial system. The economy in a social democracy is mostly in private hands, but certain public services – things that are usually not well provided by private persons – are controlled by government, either through direct ownership or by attentive regulation.
“Like what?” asked Finnolly Servus, a little suspiciously.
“Fresh air,” said Fay.
“Clean water,” said May, “and safe food.”
“Energy,” offered one of the students.
“Yes. Energy is a tricky one,” said Prof. Sparks. “It comes in various forms: electricity, gas, coal, nuclear stations, solar panels, windmills. I have come around to thinking that at least one of those should be government-owned, to maintain competition. If government electric power is provided at cost, as it was under Ontario Hydro, it keeps down the price of the other energy sources. If electricity rates go up, people can swap their electric hot water tanks for gas-heated tanks, and vice versa.”
“But Ontario Hydro ran up billions in debt,” said Finnolly Servus, without thinking.
“All utilities,” said the accountant, “public and private, are in debt. It’s because the infrastructure has to be built before the revenue flow can begin. You ought to know that, Finnolly.”
“Of course,” said Finnolly, “of course.” Then he added, “And because the money supply is all debt-money, most other industries are in debt, too.” He paused, and looked around at heads nodding agreement. “But you haven’t told me anything about social democracy that I can’t agree with.”
“Well, that’s good, Mr. Servus,” said the journalist. She gave Finnolly a devastating smile. “Once we cut through the blind ideology and the disinformation, I find most Canadians turn out to be in favour of what Prof. Sparks defines as social democracy.”
“Still,” said Finnolly, “you have to admit that it’s capitalists who create wealth and jobs. Look at Henry Ford, or, here in Canada, the Billeses, or Frank Stronach. (Finnolly held shares in Ford Motors, Canadian Tire and Magna International.)
“They weren’t capitalists,” said the journalist, “they were entrepreneurs.”
“What’s the difference?” said Finnolly, with a faint lift of his shoulders.
It wasn’t a question, but May turned it back to him, “Don’t you know, Finnolly? The entrepreneurs start up and build the enterprises. The capitalists just lend money to them, and take a slice of the profits.”
“Of course,” said Finnolly, “but –”
But what? In Finnolly’s map of “reality,” the financiers were taking up a new location – no longer partners, but parasites. He had often, himself, profited from a merger or a leveraged buyout that left the company (and the shareholders who failed to exit expeditiously enough), much worse off than before. He smiled at a phrase he had once used of such a case: “The operation was a success. Too bad the patient died.” It now seemed just a trifle callous.
“Getting back to energy,” continued Sparks, “because it is so vital to us, it needs to be regulated to guarantee a reliable supply at stable prices. Left to the private sector it produced the California brown-outs and the huge price spikes. The state of California is now suing the companies for the nine billion dollars they made in excess profits.”
“Unless the new Governor renegs,” observed the journalist, suggestively.
Finnolly Servus, recalling his own painful plunge with Enron, made a remark about the moral character of that company’s former CEO which any circumspect editor would decline to print.
Fay smiled knowingly. “There’s a report circulating on the internet that that same CEO already has the new Governor in his pocket. But that couldn’t happen in Canada, of course, could it?”
The students looked around the group, but neither the professor, the accountant, May, Finnolly Servus, nor even the journalist chose to pick up the question.
Instead Fay turned to May, “Shall we ask him?”
“Sure,” said May with a blue-eyed twinkle. “Finnolly, we’re going to a peace demonstration on Saturday. Would you like to join us? You might find it interesting.”
“I’ll be there,” said Bill Sparks.
“So will we,” said one of the students.
Finnolly for a moment saw himself as a student again. “Sure,” he said, “Where is it?”
The demonstration was more than interesting. It was exhilarating – to be one of a crowd of 12,000 people, of all ages, shapes and sizes, who seemed to be united in thinking that cooperation is better than competition. Finnolly was beginning to agree. He carried a sign he had been handed: “People Before Profits.” Mrs. Servus, in jeans and a broad-brimmed hat, walked beside him.
It was, indeed, an astounding conversion.
Gordon Coggins
— from Economic Reform, December 2003