The Value Of Capitalism Remains Constant for 80 Years

By Nitin Julka

The Daily Cardinal | April 15, 2004

 

Last week, I watched the 1923 silent film, Within the Law, which was an adaptation of the Bayard Veiller play. It was one in a series of screenings sponsored by the UW Cinematheque about Norma Talmadge, an unsung star of the silent film era.

 

Surprisingly, I only fell asleep for about 10 minutes of the 96 minute movie. The rest of the time, I did truly appreciate the silent black and white film with live piano accompaniment.

 

I was not expecting much before watching the show. I am not the artsy type and I have no clue about the silent film world. But afterwards, my mind was spinning with ideas about various aspects of the movie.

 

The quality of the picture was excellent. Besides color, there has not been much innovation in the area of film between 1920 and today. Yes, the resolution in today’s televisions is significantly better, but the basic model has not changed.

 

The plot of the film also got me thinking. It involved a young Mary Turner (Talmadge), who worked for an unscrupulous big businessman, Edward Gilder (Joseph Kilgour). Mary, who was forced to work at an awful wage, was then convicted for a crime that she did not commit: stealing from the businessman. In the courtroom,

Mary begged for clemency, but Edward persuaded the judge to sentence her to 3 years in jail. Mary vowed revenge.

 

After getting out of jail, Mary wanted to lead an honest life, but could not find employment as an ex-convict. As a result, she and her friend resorted to earning money by a series of con jobs. They extorted money from an old man and pretended to be high-class citizens. She also did all of her cons and morally dubious behavior while staying within the law.

 

Eventually, she gained success and revenge by marrying the son of her original employer. The theme of the movie was a bit disturbing. Mary was only successful by taking advantage of the legal loopholes that existed in the system. The businessman was only successful by paying his employees slave-labor wages. The message was that the only path to success was by conforming to the ways of the lying, cheating businessman and staying “within the law.”

 

I was struck by how familiar all of this sounded. In the 1920s, before labor laws, welfare, social security, and a regulated economy, this made some sense. The Bolshevik revolution had just overthrown the government in Russia, and America had just experienced its first Red Scare. The fact is that most people did not know whether or not communism would be successful.

 

Today, we know that communism fails. It makes far less sense to use these socialist scare tactics when history has proven communism to be an economically unviable solution. Read F.A.

Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom (1944) for an incredible discussion of the relationship between socialism and human freedom

 

But today in Madison, people still rail against the big corporations, low wages, and all the ills of consumerism and capitalism. Yet these same people will shop at Urban Outfitters, tinker with their MP3 players, and enjoy all the fruits of progress that our market economy brings.

 

Since the 1920s, businesspeople have been condemned for their greed and obsession with money. Yet business, competition, globalization, and money are the best tools for human progress that we have yet discovered.

 

Why do some countries develop into modern successful societies, while others remain behind? The key is that open participation in the global marketplace causes countries to spend their energy specializing in certain types of production instead of trying to create all of their goods on their own. With this global division of labor, countries can all have the highest quality goods at the best global price.

 

The result is a significantly higher standard of living for countries that open their markets. The great progress of India, China, Uganda, and Chile has been because of their willingness to open their markets.

 

So a random silent movie proved to be an inspiring experience. I started thinking about the context of the film, its history, and its parallels to today. As a graduating senior, the thing I regret most is not taking full advantage of the great resources of our University.

 

If it is the Distinguished Lecture Series, intramural sports, or even a silent film showing, we should fully utilize the tremendous opportunities here at UW.