Guardian Unlimited | Netnews | The big con

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Strata Rose Chalup (strata@virtual.net)
Date: Sat Jan 06 2001 - 13:45:01 PST


The big con

As the US cuts interest rates in a
bid to stave off recession, Thomas
Frank explains how the "New
Economy" was always based on a
dangerous myth

http://www.guardianunlimited.co.uk/internetnews/story/0,7369,418419,00.html

-- 
========================================================================
Strata Rose Chalup [KF6NBZ]                      strata "@" virtual.net
VirtualNet Consulting                            http://www.virtual.net/
 ** Project Management & Architecture for ISP/ASP Systems Integration **
=========================================================================

Guardian Unlimited | Netnews | The big con
Guardian Unlimited   
The Guardian
Go to:  
Guardian Unlimited
Home UK latest World latest Special reports Audio Talk Search Help
 The Guardian Newslist The wrap Columnists Net news The weblog Quiz

Net news






  Search this site
  Tools
Text-only version
Send it to a friend
Read it later
See saved stories




 Related stories
The big con

Online auctions - bidder beware

BT adds financial research to website armoury

Fashionable attention paid to Boo's buyer

Intel inside the portable gadget market

Napster masters harmony with leading indie label

Don't burst the dot.com bubble

Lo makes familiar pitch with a difference - revenues

On message

Letsbuyit faces abyss as rescue talks fail

Software star delivers body blow

Neuer Markt

Old economy to make a comeback

Much more than a bubble

BT begins to let its rivals in

Business: How eToys crashed

The year dot.com turned into dot.bomb

Start-up backers suffer flagging fortunes

Letsbuyit problems add to dot.com gloom

Doubts over big signing

Lucent piles on tech woes

How to make a Fortune on the quiet

On message

QXL joins the 99% club

Zone sues BT over unmetered access

Vodafone insists BT is an ally in Tokyo

NewMedia makes 46m writedown

Business: BT rivals rough up Bonfield at loop hearing

How PlayStation 2 is helping us rule the roost

Comment: Unions.dot.com

Durlacher admits big losses lie ahead

Workers click to avoid the crowds

Daily Mail shrugs off declining profits to keep spending

Egg ready to challenge IF

Desmond sells the Express websites for 1

Today's big issue is the net

E-bank plan halted for a Goldfish evolution

Dot.com workers tempted by unions

Autonomy takes Japan

Quiet plodders beat dot.com dashers

Media Guardian: Trinity Mirror launches showbiz wesbite

Media Guardian: Express websites to be axed?

Into the Silicon valley of hope they gallop

Goldman trims Microsoft forecast

Late chips knock BATM for 600m

Infogrames buys ailing Hasbro games outfit

Second sight: Rethinking the future

Confetti sweeps up wedding competitors

Merrill may have got it Plum wrong

SurfControl

On message

UPC shake-up to follow failure of $5bn Excite merger

e-briefs: on message

Oftel tries to cut loop deadlock

Radiant picks up the net access slack

At this price? Dataflex

Business: Glimmer of hi-tech hope from two fallen stars

Business: Lastminute says patience will pay dividends

E-business: need a leased line?

Media Guardian: Can Emap jump its Q on to the net bandwagon?

@large

Jobs and Money: Online finance

Jobs and Money: Net dealers

QXL raises 30m but staff must go

Better communications

How going online can help farmers

Increased efficiency is a click away

Websites for SMEs

Getting the message through

Signing up for the e-revolution

Can e-tail cash in this year?

techMARK 100 tumbles to new low

Learning curve

PlayStation2 delay does nothing to console Eidos

Bookham leads hi-tech drop

Lloyds treads softly in Spain

Business: I2S halts flotations

Business: Microsoft says trial infected with error

Business: Pres.net follows in Santa's sleigh tracks

From start-up to dot woe

Desmond to axe Express websites

More dash than full stop for dotcoms

Fibrenet share price tumbles

Teamtalk charges ahead

Another bad day in the Brink affair

Founder Joe de Saram absent as Rhodium folds owing 1m

Second sight

Wanadoo seen as likely bidder for Freeserve

Jakob's ladder to web wealth

On message

Business: News Analysis

Dot.coms battle to buck the downhill trend

Ban on Yahoo! Nazi site

E-briefs

Arnault joins Suez in 3G bid

BT hots up tech firm incubator

Comment: No IT, no comment

Early bidder will be booking a bargain ticket

Tenors online

Bluetac to sell off financial website

TheStreet hits dead end in UK

Scoot stays positive despite doubled loss

Consumers pay the price in 3G auction

Cyberspace is about to arrive on the doorstep

Mysis bucks the start-up trend

TheStreet turns bumpy for UK site

Net news: MP3.com tries again

Bubble bursts for Interactive Investor

EU rules blamed for adding 500 to price of a car

C&W wants to go spending

Nasdaq dives as investors flee

Net shopping boom as Britons go online

Three boldly go to market

Dotcom world's wizards are in the pink

Dimension Data profits rise 62%

Sportingbet will use AIM entry to fund expansion

E-markets struggle to win trust

Pre-budget statement: Start-ups

Pre-budget statement: Incentives

Lavazza wires caffeine to the web

Software firm's fortunes turn

Starting up on the net: Rools co-founders

Who wants to be an e-millionaire?

Why pets don't win any prizes

Anxious times for the revolution

Gameplay performs

Shoppers may vote with their mice

QXL opens bidding with live Wembley auction

Attempt to make avatars more convincing

Queen invests in record label run by anti-royalist

Leader: dot.com slump

Boo! I'm back

Comment: Edmond Warner on corporations' astuteness

Grey power makes a dot.comback

Finding your ideal home is easier online

Hi-tech jitters hit home

Credit Suisse joins MSN portal

Nortel tremours hit hi-tech indices

Boo is reborn in confident fashion

On message

Buying virtual bargains

Microsoft spins $1bn web relaunch to challenge AOL

Nations united in trade

QXL.com needs a lifeline if it is to stay afloat

Cashing in on the kids

Nortel fallout hammers tech stocks

Reuters links with banks in FX deal

Oftel proposes shared local access

Cheer for Amazon as losses ease

Autonomy makes deal with NTT

Cyber-rabbi to go global

Consumer experts online - at a price

US praises Blair for hi-tech successes

Funding rumours boost QXL shares

AltaVista must find new chief

Comment: The rise and fall of e-business

People need banking - not banks

BT fails to call Genie out of bottle

C&W adds Baynton to stable

Parthus chip sends share price smartly upward

Sun's shine bolsters Nasdaq

EMI takes secure stride on download path

BT to offer 'free' off-peak calls

Nasdaq bubble slowly deflating

Debenhams fights back

On message

Business: Egg expands

Business: Ebookers sales up

Starting up

No post is just fine for IBM

Beware e-powered consumers

Vauxhall aims for net gain in fresh car wars campaign

Thanks for the tip

New horizons for Time

Bears savage tech stocks

Business: 300p a share 'will buy Freeserve'

Business: Boxman races against time for survival

ARM acts to break mobile dependency

Business: E-briefs

Business: Hoover's Online sweeps into Europe

Business: Going down

IT may be secret of painless growth

Leighton joins Lastminute

City briefing

'Nobody wanted to hear about risk amid the euphoria'

Web veg for city dwellers

Caught between a crash and a hard landing

Online retailers forced to the brink

A study in failure

Teamtalk wins deal with AOL

Logica's 370m woos Germans

MediDesk targets doctors

At this price? Lastminute.com

Business: For you the war is never over

Business: Mezzanine sashays out of dance music site

On message

QXL price is bid down

Business: Acorn refugees sell for 400m

Business: Hewitt backs Oftel on local loop

Business: New computer bill that probes too much

Winterflood nets 3m bonus

Business: Orange challenges

Cahoot 'giveaway' gauntlet to IF

The new economy must come of age

UK needs the right e-envoy

Online bank goes live - but by phone only

Can the Yanks still pull it off?

Negroponte invests in web swap shop

On message

At this price? Inflexion

Give it your best shot

Will you pay? That's the real question

Lastminute.com signs Amex deal

Vic Chandler started a betting revolution by moving to Gibraltar

Diary of a Dot.com

Internet loyalty scheme hits UK

Internet auctions spur trade in grisly murder souvenirs

Dot.com dominance

Heavy going forecast for the betting shop

The supermarket that delivers

Boots will post your snaps on the web

On message

Virtual Internet triples turnover

Business: Baltimore steps up security with Content buy

Scramble begins for Europe

Doing the big deal

An easier way to turn clicks to cash

Israeli telecoms darling takes a tumble in Nasdaq's wake

At this price? EasyNet

Lastminute lock-up

On message

Scoot files 'dirty tricks' dossier

Web watch: Domain names

Tiscali buys out World Online

Next click, France

American will head BT Cellnet

Is a new internet credit card for kids a good idea ?

Threat to $130bn AOL deal

Results row hits Sema shares

Consumers are in the high-speed driving seat

Clickmango rescue effort fails

11,000 a week buys a bargain

Vivendi adds to Scoot's buying power

It's all herd again, with very little seen

Business: Net hotels reverse bunker mentality

Net traders locked out of stock market

Jungle.com sold for 37m

On message

GUS to pay 36m for Jungle.com

Bullish 365 ready to snap up ailing rivals

Is Europe moving too fast?

Doomed AltaVista chief quits

Letsbuyit cuts 20% of staff despite sales surge

Letsbuyit.com announces job losses

Letsbuyit.com announces job losses

Atos-Origin deal creates new IT player in Europe

Need to know: Jacqueline Rouse

Ford joins dealers to sell online

Game-swap teenage pioneer feels the Napster effect

Driving a hard web bargain

Enterprise Asia board tries to discredit predator

Amazon car sales face bumpy road

Treasury taps new store of airwave riches

FSA orders net blackout on share tips

On message

Shell collectors scan Israel

Cool operators make hay as net sun shines

QXL pays less for rival to keep expansion on track

Flooz flirts with British launch

Financial news sites merge with web host

Li deal dashes C&W hope of 5bn to spend

Freecom.net blues

Should the web create its own money?

Who still dares to venture?

Freecom jumps 14% after chief resigns

Freeserve in slow lane

Sale QXL could do without

Big banks join Reuters for online forex venture

Internet share deals down by a third

WPP reports first half 1.2bn

On message

Dixons deal sees Freeserve and Gameplay link up

We go shopping to buy an insight into the teenager's mind

Dot.com down-side comes home to California

In legal eyes, 3i and iii may be the same

QXL.com partner wavers

Amazon joins Toys R Us online

Users log on less to iii

Fledgling Mondus raises 100m with sale of 40% stake

Sitting on the stock of eBay

Netting new customers

Durlacher subsidiary KVault Software a success

Hi-tech devices keep manufacturing afloat

On message

EC gives e-commerce exchange the go-ahead

Leader: Britain has not got the hang of online retail

Ailing health e-tailer wins reprieve

Barclays buy into Linq

Fears over relaunch of lastminute.com dismissed

On message

Autonomy makes case for fast growth

Lastminute.com makes 9.3m loss

Baltimore Technologies sales boom spans globe

ICL scraps float plan

City briefing

Bigsave.com shelves stock market listing

Brussels grapples with B2B question

On message

Redstone targets ISP purchase

Sony and DoCoMo forge net links

On message

Toad gears up for in-car television

Competition blamed for Thus troubles

Phone delays hit Filtronic revenue

Pearson undermines a moribund tradition

Clickmango founders seek new ventures

Starting up on the internet

Plastic protection from online demons

Investor nervousness cuts iTouch value by half

Corner shops to aid online purchasers

What's new

New economy, old equity

Forbidden's progress takes market cap to 188m

Reading between the online perks

BSkyB poaches Adidas chief

Any fool can create their own e-commerce site. Many do so

Mitchell to join internet incubator venture

Letsbuyit goes for cut-price flotation

Accidental millionaires sell First Tuesday

Why shoppers shy away from the net

Conveyancing website aims to cut gazumping and stress of moving home

Net millionaires are raring to go

Web homes in with sales war

Internet investors really dig the mines

Later on a Sunday for Tesco's online shoppers

Virgin's train site loses net hallmark

Virtual video's inventor faces web fadeout



The big con

As the US cuts interest rates in a bid to stave off recession, Thomas Frank explains how the "New Economy" was always based on a dangerous myth
More net news


Saturday January 6, 2001

As the 20th century came to an end, Newsweek magazine chose to mark its passing with a strong dose of the hokey cultural populism Americans have loved ever since the 1930s. Leading the celebration, Newsweek staffer Kenneth Auchincloss cast a long look back on the events of the "people's century" and opined that for once in human experience "ordinary folks changed history".

In support of this bold assertion of popular empowerment, Auchincloss singled out a succession of heroes who had changed things over the course of the century: suffragettes, feminists, the anti-war and civil rights movements, and, finally, "the entrepreneurs", this last group illustrated with a drawing of Bill Gates. Although his story brimmed with 30s populist stylings, Auchincloss took pains to point out that the landmark economic reforms of that decade weren't nearly as wonderful as everyone thought. And while the story hailed the richest man in the world as a champion of the common people, the labour movement was not mentioned at all.

Indeed, wherever one looked in the 90s, entrepreneurs were occupying the ideological space once filled by the noble sons of toil. From the pages of Newsweek to the smiling bubble-talk of CNBC, the cable channel devoted to covering the stock market, it was businessmen who were sounding off against the arrogance of elites, railing against the privilege of old money, protesting about false expertise and waging relentless, idealistic war on the principle of hierarchy wherever it could be found.

From Deadheads to Nobel-laureate economists, from palaeo-conservatives to New Democrats, American leaders in the 90s came to believe that markets were a popular system, a far more democratic form of organisation than (democratically elected) governments. This is the central premise of what I call "market populism": that in addition to being mediums of exchange, markets are mediums of consent. With their mechanisms of supply and demand, poll and focus group, superstore and internet, markets managed to express the popular will more articulately and meaningfully than did mere elections. By their very nature markets conferred democratic legitimacy, markets brought down the pompous and the snooty, markets looked out for the interests of the little guy, markets gave us what we wanted. As journalist Robert Samuelson announced in 1998, "the Market 'R' Us".

One of the reasons market populism prospered so fantastically in the 90s was that it was an extremely useful doctrine. As business leaders melded themselves with the common people, they discovered powerful new weapons to use against their traditional enemies in government and organised labour. Since it was markets that expressed the will of the people, virtually any criticism of business could be described as an act of "elitism" arising out of despicable contempt for the common man.

According to market populism, elitists were not those who, say, watch sporting events from a private box, or spend their weekends pottering on a computer-driven yacht, or fire half their workforce and ship the factory south. No, elitists were the people on the other side of the equation: the trade unionists and Keynesians who believed that society could be organised in any way other than the market way. Since what the market does - no matter how whimsical, irrational or harmful - was the Will of the People, any scheme to operate outside its auspices or control its ravages was by definition a dangerous artifice, the hubris of false expertise.

This fantasy of the market as an anti-elitist machine made the most sense when it was couched in the language of social class. Businessmen and pro-business politicians have always protested about the use of "class war" by their critics on the left; during the 90s, though, they happily used the tactic themselves, depicting the workings of the market as a kind of permanent social revolution in which daring entrepreneurs endlessly toppled fat cats and picked off the millions of lazy rich kids.

The scions of ancient banking families were said to be finding their smug selves wiped out by the streetwise know-how of some kid with a goatee; the arrogant stockbrokers of old were being humiliated by the e-trade masses; the Wasps with their regimental ties were getting their asses kicked by the women, the Asians, the Africans, the Hispanics; the buttoned-down whip-cracking bosses were being fired by the corporate "change agents"; the self-assured network figures were being reduced to tears by the vox populi of the web. A thousand populist revolts shook the office blocks of the nation, and the great forums of corporate ideology overflowed with praise for in-your-face traders from gritty urban backgrounds, for the CEO who still retained the crude manners of the longshoreman.

It was a strange faith but, by the middle of the 90s, it was a populism in the ascendancy. Everyone seemed to find what they wanted in the magic of markets. Markets were serving all tastes, markets were humiliating the pretentious, markets were permitting good art to triumph over bad, markets were overthrowing the man, markets were extinguishing discrimination, markets were making everyone rich.

In the right hands, market populism could explain nearly any social phenomenon. The "tiger economies" of Asia had collapsed, market populists told us, because they had relied on the expertise of elites rather than the infinite wisdom of the people. Similarly, the economies of western Europe were stagnant because the arrogant aristocrats every red-blooded American knows run those lands were clinging to old welfare-state theories. The House of Morgan was swallowed up by Chase Manhattan because it was a snooty outfit that had foolishly tried to resist the democracy of markets.

More important, market populism proved astonishingly versatile as a defence of any business beset by meddling critics in government, union or environmental movement. On the Wall Street Journal editorial page, one saw market populism wheeled out to defend the advertising industry, to defend the auto industry, to bolster demands that the software industry be permitted to import more workers, to hail stock options as the people's true currency and, most remarkably, to defend Microsoft from its antitrust pursuers. Since a company's size (like the value of a billionaire's pile) was simply a reflection of the people's love, antitrust itself was fundamentally illegitimate, a device used by elitist politicians, the Journal once proclaimed, "to promote the interests of the few at the expense of the many".

Even after the Microsoft verdict had been announced, the paper continued to assert that the company "should have argued that we have a monopoly because our customers want us to have one". And when Al Gore began annoying the men of privilege last autumn with his (admittedly feeble) attacks on big business, the paper responded in the most direct manner imaginable. "Mr Bush should tell Americans [that] when my opponent attacks 'big corporations', he's attacking you and me."

Market populism proved particularly useful in the workplace. Whether you toiled for one of the great American corporations, for some zesty startup, or on an assembly line, workers in the 90s couldn't help but realise that class power was lopsided as never before. Management held all the cards in the 90s, and CEOs were able to work their will without encountering much organised resistance. The corporation "delayered", throwing off entire levels of white-collar workers; it "disaggregated", ridding itself of its extraneous operations; it embraced "flexibility", replacing career employees with zero-benefits temps; it "outsourced" every possible piece of work to the lowest bidder; it "re-engineered" its various processes in a less labour-intensive way; it "disintermediated", used new technology to cut out middlemen and move "back office" jobs to the lowest-paid climes on earth. Unions shrank before professionally directed assaults and, in the US, organised workers finally slipped below 10% of the private sector workforce. Meanwhile, the remuneration awarded to American CEOs rose to astronomical levels. In 1999, corporate chiefs were paid, on average, some 475 times what their blue-collar employees took home.

Yet to read the management literature of the decade, what was really going on in the world of the corporation was democratisation. Whatever recommendations individual gurus might make regarding the structure of the workplace, the management literature of the 90s almost universally insisted that its larger project was liberation, giving a voice to the voiceless, "empowering" the individual, subverting the pretensions of the mighty, and striking blows against hierarchy of all kinds.

Management theory performed this reversal by redefining the workplace power struggle. The problems of the corporation weren't its upward redistribution of wealth or its refusal to bargain with its workers collectively or the massive disparities between bosses and bossed; the real problems were moral ones - "elitism", "arrogance", "certainty." And these were to be solved by embracing the Jacobin forces of the market ever more closely, by throwing out such distasteful relics of the past asloyalty and lifetime employment.

Understood this way, the true warriors for workplace democracy weren't trade unionists; they were the new breed of executives - the ones who abjured stuffy suits for casual wear, the zany "change agents", the makers of wow. Readers of new business magazines like Fast Company and Business 2.0 thrilled to tales of caring CEOs, of bosses who sat in cubicles like everyone else, of white-collar workers who demanded the right to drink beer and wear jeans in the office.

The entrepreneur, by virtue of his or her close relationship to the market, was the true bearer of populist humility - and also the true hero of the common man. Über-guru Tom Peters claimed that, in terms of the populist lexicon, the dotcom millionaires and the working class had switched moral positions - even stretching this absurd argument so far as to apply the populist keyword "parasite" to describe the very folks who once made up the labour movement.

"When I began working as a management consultant at McKinsey & Co in 1974," he wrote in 1997, "'we' (the professional service people - accountants, lawyers, consultants, ad agency denizens) were considered the parasites... living off the sweat of real people's brows. Times have changed. And how! The nerds have won! Bill Gates is the richest man in the world! It is the Age of Brainware. Now the people who lift 'things' (the rapidly declining fraction) are the new parasites living off the carpal-tunnel syndrome of the computer programmers' perpetually strained keyboard hands."

Again Bill Gates's money is thought, unproblematically and transparently, to endow him with the approval of the people, to establish him as vicar of the general will. This may seem silly at first, but it was a logic that yielded results. By insisting that bosses were the real commoners, that outsourcing was an act of humility, that downsizing was just an opportunity to pursue your personal authenticity, that corporations were, by virtue of their attunement to market forces, bearers of a kind of soulfulness that government and union could never touch, management theory brought an unprecedented degree of workplace quiescence.

It was thanks, at least in part, to the hyperbolic prose of Tom Peters and his colleagues that so many of the downsized agreed that what had happened to them was right, was necessary, was justified; it was thanks to the revolutionary crowing of magazines like Fast Company that so many left the parking lots of their former employers in such an orderly fashion, talking confidently about their impending careers as "free agents". Even more tellingly, in a decade when unemployment got as low as 4% - making management extremely vulnerable to demands for increased wages - union organising and strike activity remained at their lowest points since the 1920s. That the US was able to endure the wrenching upward redistribution of wealth that it did in the 90s with only small, localised outbreaks of social unrest must be chalked up, in part, to the literature that explicitly sought to persuade the world of the goodness and the justice of that redistribution.

Market populism did equally valuable service in the passionately, stridently optimistic rhetoric of the rising stock market. As everyone knows by now, the 90s was supposed to have been the age of Wall Street's "democratisation". The myth went like this. Once upon a time the world of finance had been a place of elites, of unbridled snobbery, of wealthy Wasps in suits, sneering at the common people and keeping this glorious thing, the stock market, all to themselves. But the great bull market of the 1990s, the myth continues, was something different: a bull market of the people, a powerful tool for economic democracy. This bull market was thought to be the Götterdämmerung of the ruling class, the final victory of the common people over their former masters.

Sometimes this "democratisation" was spoken of as a sort of social uprising, a final routing of the snobbish old-guard culture of Wall Street. Sometimes it was said to be the market itself that had worked these great changes, that had humiliated the suits and enriched all sorts of colourful proletarians. Sometimes it was described as a demographic phenomenon, a reflection of the vast percentage of the nation's population that was now entrusting their savings to the market. But however you looked at it, one thing was sure. The common people, we were told, understood this market, warmed to it instinctively the way they would a beloved relative.

At the same time, we were told, the old-money elites just didn't get it, and they flailed and failed as the little people paid them back for centuries of snooty hauteur. The decade was filled with corny tales of down-home investors whipping the pros. In the early 90s we thrilled to stories of Warren Buffett, the down-home billionaire; of Peter Lynch, the man who told us to forget about the complex stuff and invest in the companies that made our favourite everyday products; and of the Beardstown Ladies, a group of small-town Illinois grandmas whose local investment club was said to have racked up some gigantic figure or other by investing in humble, populist companies like Wal-Mart. The point of the episode wasn't the ladies' investing advice, which was fairly rudimentary (like how to read the stock listings in the newspaper), but instead a moral lesson, a demonstration that even society's feeblest, lowliest and worst-informed - kindly grannies from the ever innocent small-town midwest - could beat, as they put it, the "self-important MBAs" of "New York, or Zurich, or Tokyo".

In the late 90s we were deluged with tales of average people prospering hugely by investing in hi-tech stocks: the secretaries who had been transformed into mil lionaires by the grace of Microsoft; the college dropouts whose stock options had showered on them the kind of money most of us can't even imagine. The fantastic appreciation in internet shares in 1998 and 1999 was said to be a special sort of boom, one that was only comprehensible to the unpretentious. While the hated "experts", those cosmopolitan sophisticates who are the enemy in all populist narratives, carped and doubted, the common people trusted their new corporate heroes without reservation or cynicism. While the old money looked at the numbers and sold short, We, the People got it. The internet was democracy itself, the golden promise of interactivity descended unto earth to help usher us into a populist utopia. And in each of the dotcom favourites we perceived some distillation of market populism: an online bookstore that was supposed to be the apotheosis of democratic business practice; a vendor of airline tickets that empowered consumers; a flea market without walls that we fancied a "community" in the most exalted sense.

None of it really worked out as promised, of course. Just as the Beardstown Ladies were later revealed to have exaggerated their gains, so all the overheated talk about the infinite democracy of cyberspace turned out to be the concerted puffery of an industry whose real source of optimism was its discovery that it was able to palm off one overpriced flotation after another on the most credulous market in decades.

As the Nasdaq fell some 50% from its high in March 2000, we learned the appalling price of Wall Street's phoney populism. But it may have been too late. In the political sphere, Wall Street was able to parlay what seemed to be overwhelming public support into victory after victory over its traditional antagonists in government. Antitrust enforcement was allowed to go slack (the Microsoft case notwithstanding), the Glass-Steagall banking act was repealed, and - glory of glories - a Republican president was elected promising to "privatise" social security, to turn over to Wall Street the vast public funds that secure the nation's retirement.

Nor was all of this confined to the US. Wherever the "New Economy" touched its magic finger, it seems, the same perverse cultural logic appeared, recasting economic discussion along these oddly inverted democratic lines. In Britain it was most clearly identifiable in the person of Tony Blair, a man who has so perfected the fake populist style that he hands out honours to humble lollipop ladies with one hand while privatising the Underground with the other. But it also informs the work of political theorists like Charles Leadbeater of Demos, whose 1999 "New Economy" book Living on Thin Air asserts that democracy and the dawning "knowledge economy" are somehow intrinsically linked. Even while admitting that the "New Economy" wildly skews the distribution of a society's wealth, Leadbeater insisted that it was nonetheless a more democratic mode than its predecessor, since it thrived on "a culture of dissent, dispute, disrespect for authority, diversity and experimentation". Sneer at the fat cats all you want - just don't interfere with their stock options.

Tellingly, Leadbeater also suggested that to fully swallow the ways of the "New Economy", Britain would have to adopt a new "narrative", an "engaging and compelling account of [the] future that captures the popular imagination, and which people can buy into, endorsing and enacting it in their everyday lives". And it was as a narrative of social legitimacy that market populism has proven most useful. Looking out at what has been the most lopsided prosperity in our lifetimes, market populism told us that all was well, that with the demise of the welfare state and the crushing of union power a newer, more extreme form of economic democracy was being born. Because our billionaires were so cool, because our websites were so very interactive, this was the most democratic of all possible worlds.

• This article is based on Thomas Frank's One Market Under God: Extreme Capitalism, Market Populism and the End of Economic Democracy, which is published on Monday by Secker & Warburg (17.99). The author is editor of the Baffler magazine, a journal of cultural criticism, and lives in Chicago. The Baffler website can be accessed at www.thebaffler.com


 

UP  

   

 

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2001


Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jan 06 2001 - 13:54:21 PST