Not being familiar with American law, I cannot comment on whether or not the alleged behavior of Robert Halderman actually represents illegal conduct.
But contrary to the assertions of his legal council, his alleged conduct was certainly not an act of capitalism.
Frankly, I am tired of hearing terms like ‘capitalist’ and ‘entrepreneur’ used in efforts to downplay the seriousness of illegal and/or grossly immoral behavior. These types of words should be reserved for those who are truly worthy of being described as such.
The ‘Tiger Woods’ defence
Mr. Halderman is charged with first-degree grand larceny in connection with a failed attempt to secure payments of up to $2 million dollars from David Letterman in return for silence about the talk show host’s affairs with female employees (refer article). Allegedly, Halderman threatened to go public after the discovery that his ex girlfriend was one of the women involved.
In an attempt to have the charges dropped, Halderman’s lawyer, Gerald Shragel, compared his client to women linked to Tiger Woods (who were reportedly paid to keep quiet), claiming that “their behavior was capitalist, not criminal,” and that “(The) reality is that evidence of celebrity misdeeds has a significant market value.” (refer article,)
Blackmail not what capitalism is about
The question of whether Halderman’s alleged behavior indeed represents criminal conduct will be decided by the American judicial system in due course.
But was it capitalist behavior? No way.
Dictionary.com defines capitalism as:
“an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, esp. as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth.”
Neither blackmail nor larceny are mentioned in any part of this definition. Nor, I doubt, would they be associated with the word in any other dictionary. They are not what capitalism is about and they have no place in any form of economic system, and though efforts on the part of defence council to downplay the nature of their clients’ alleged behavior are certainly understandable, I grow tired of the way in which concepts like capitalism get abused in the process.
The same applies to the concept of entrepreneurialism, a term all-too-often abused in describing the organisation of blatantly criminal or immoral operations for financial gain.
(Blackmail is defined as “any payment extorted by intimidation, as by threats or injurious revelations or accusations” and “the extortion of such a payment“)
Capitalism Vs Blackmail
Let’s have a look at a few differences between capitalism and blackmail:
Capitalism is an economic system. Blackmail and larceny are acts of criminal conduct.
Capitalist behavior serves genuine needs for end-consumers. Blackmail and larceny do not.
Capitalism appeals to those who seek reward for courage, initiative, diligence, hard work and sensible risk taking.
Blackmail and larceny appeal to the lazy and dishonest – those who seek to get rich quick via opportunistic behavior.
Capitalist behavior is legal in free-market economies. Blackmail and larceny are not.
Capitalist behavior (usually) contributes in a positive manner toward society. Blackmail and larceny do not.
The American judicial system will decide whether or not Halderman has breached the law. But regardless of the outcome, his alleged behavior is not what capitalism is all about.
Let’s leave words like ‘capitalist’ and ‘entrepreneur’ to those who are worthy of being described as such – those who seek reward through courage, initiative, risk-taking, diligence and hard work.
Recent Comments