Capitalism has always depended on state patronage

Even after the state has saved capitalism from itself, Simon Heffer continues to lionise the free ma

Simon Heffer's assertion in today's Daily Telegraph that the free market will recover once politicians "stop interfering" is both historically and economically illiterate.

His claim is particularly galling at a time when the state has once more been forced to save capitalism from itself. But more than this, the right-wing belief in a golden age when Thomas Jefferson's dictum, "that government is best which governs least", was obediently followed is a delusion. From its birth in the 18th century onwards, capitalism has always depended on stage patronage.

It is therefore ironic that Heffer should continue to lionise America as the "home of capitalism", a country where corporate welfare was growing long before the financial crisis. Heffer is fond of attacking New Labour's "client state", populated by public sector workers and welfare claimants, but he conveniently ignores the rows of corporate claimants at home and abroad.

For instance, a 2008 report by the Cato Institute estimated that in 2006 the US government spent $92bn on subsidising corporations such as Boeing and General Electric. It was Gore Vidal who first identified this collusion between the state and monopoly capitalism as "capitalism for the poor and socialism for the rich".

It is equally disingenous of Heffer to hail Barclays' £3 billion profit as a sign that we are returning to business as usual. As my colleague Mehdi Hasan pointed out earlier this week, while the government may not have taken shares in Barclays, it did provide significant loans and guarantees to the bank.

After the humiliation of Big Finance this year, one continues to long for some modesty from its cheerleaders.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Show Hide image

Telegraph rebrands shadow cabinet member Diane Abbott MP “Corbyn’s former lover”

Shadow international development secretary in demotion by rightwing newspaper SHOCK.

Diane Abbott is a Labour MP, and has been since 1987. She is now in the shadow cabinet, as shadow international development secretary. She's a pretty senior politician, all told. But this hasn't stopped the Telegraph choosing to describe her as "Corbyn's former lover". In a story that has nothing to do with the Labour leader, or the MP's past relationship with him.

In fact, there's no sex in this story at all. It's about a traffic scheme.

Here's how they promoted it on Twitter:

And here's the first line of the piece:

General sexism in reporting aside, your mole can't help thinking there were other traffic concerns at play when this piece was written...

I'm a mole, innit.