A perceptive and well-written essay, I find little to disagree with in it. But it still manages to overlook what is probably capitalism's greatest contribution to the marketplace of ideas: competition forces change for the better (at least, more often than not). It is a position capitalists swear by, yet they seem to be blind when applying it to themselves.

Modern economic life would be an intolerable nightmare if capitalism had not been forced to respond to the challenge of the 19th century anarchists and socialists, and even the 20th century communist dictatorships they eventually evolved into. Capitalism is tolerable precisely because it was tempered, forced to moderate and yield, which it did so only after prolonged and sometimes brutal resistance. It was not going to go there without a little prodding. And the struggle is not over yet.

The inevitable excesses and contradictions in capitalism's critics are real, and it is perfectly legitimate to point them out, and even roll them back. But it is never the case that if something is flawed, its negation is wonderful. That is simply not true, and it is not right.

There is no law in either Smith or Marx that says pendulums cannot swing too far the other way, either way. The only solution is what Marx called "synthesis", and which we are now starting to recognize as capitalist "adaptation". From the clash of opposing ideas can come workable solutions, not mere compromises (a wishy-washy word implying surrender to the inevitable manifesting itself as the worst of both worlds) but as a resonance (to borrow a term from physics signifying opposing frequencies interacting to form a single harmonious note.

America has always been good at this, especially in economics, combining the natural dynamism and intrinsic power of a free market with the human compassion and common sense of sound management and stewardship. After all, even robber barons insist on running their companies with an iron fist, there is no free marketplace of ideas in their boardrooms! America tamed the excesses of Victorian capitalism with enlightened social legislation. That was not a tragedy, it was a triumph.

But in a free market, the temptation of the ideologue, left or right, is to always mistake a good idea with the Word of the Lord. We must continue to do what America has always done, accept ideas from all sides, hammer together something that gives results that we can all live with, and not be afraid to change it if it doesn't work.

For my own part, I find much of value in conservative thought, but I am also not afraid to admit that liberal policies are also essential. What I do find intolerable is the idea that one side, either side, has somehow found the answer, the ONLY answer, because they and they alone have accepted the true, correct, obvious principles they and only they seem capable of seeing. From Communist or Fascist, I reject that. The right wing ideologues of today sound and act exactly like the left wing radicals I knew in the 60s. Whatever I may find of value in their program is negated by their arrogance, hatred, and refusal to grasp that their opponents may be rational and decent human beings. No ideology has a monopoly on principles, and if they actually believe they do, they are not only mistaken, they are dangerous.