Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Capitalism Without Competition Is Oligarchy

America’s problem is not capitalism – it’s the corruption of competition

Opinion

Capitalism Without Competition Is Oligarchy
1 U.S.A dollar banknotes

For decades, Americans were told that globalization and free markets would deliver broadly shared prosperity. Instead, many saw stagnant wages, hollowed-out communities, and a growing concentration of wealth and power. The backlash was inevitable. But the real failure was not capitalism itself. It was the corruption of competition and the establishment’s generations-long indifference to the working class it left behind. That disregard didn’t just crater trust in institutions; it fueled populist backlash across the political spectrum, with anti-establishment anger now reshaping American politics.

Two truths define the American economic dilemma. First: competitive capitalism remains history’s most powerful engine for wealth creation, driving greater aggregate prosperity over the past two centuries than perhaps any other economic system. But averages are dangerous fictions; a man can easily drown in a lake that is, on average, two feet deep.


Second: the laissez-faire ideology that achieved near-religious status in recent decades has mutated into something closer to crony capitalism than genuine market competition.

Free markets do not emerge naturally; they are enforced political constructs. If markets work, it is because rules make them work. In American political rhetoric, faith in markets was often distorted into the fiction that the government’s best role was total noninterference. But Adam Smith’s real insight was not that markets should be left alone, but that competition disciplines self-interest into socially productive outcomes. Properly structured, the system aligns private ambition with public benefit: entrepreneurs profit by creating products and services consumers prefer over competing alternatives. It is the dynamic of competition that results in consumer surplus.

A fundamental principle in Smith’s model is that entrepreneurs must play fairly under a set of transparent, agreed-upon rules. Ironically, our crony capitalism model depends on the precise opposite of what Smith had in mind: unfairly advantaged producers raising structural obstacles to quash the very competition that benefits consumers. America’s most powerful corporations no longer win by competing. They win by rewriting the rules of competition. This is what drives today’s crisis of democratic legitimacy.

Markets fail in predictable ways. That is why government intervention is not a betrayal of capitalism, but often a prerequisite for making it work. The most common market failures are:

  1. Information asymmetry. Markets break when participants operate with radically unequal information. That is why institutions like the FDA, FTC, and SEC exist: to reduce deception, protect consumers, and preserve trust.
  1. Externalities. Firms maximize profits by widening the gap between revenues and costs. But when some costs—such as carbon emissions—are shifted onto society, markets stop pricing reality. This is not just a moral failure—it is an economic distortion. If firms were required to account for external costs, capitalism’s innovation engine would race to solve the problem. In such a system, the winning firm would be the one that delivers value with the lowest real social cost. Properly designed regulation could align capitalist incentives with climate solutions.
  1. Underinvestment in public goods. Some goods are chronically underprovided by markets because their benefits are shared too broadly to be captured privately. Infrastructure, clean air and water, parks, national security, emergency services, and public education all fall into this category. Few public investments have delivered returns as consistently as education, which produces more productive citizens and reduces long-term social costs.

A healthy capitalist system should also serve the public good. But this balance collapses when dominant firms evade the costs they impose on society while simultaneously shaping the political rules meant to constrain them. At that point, the interests of economic elites diverge from those of the public—even if GDP keeps rising. Left unchecked, that divergence only widens. If capitalism becomes merely a mechanism for incumbents to privatize gains while socializing costs, collapse is not a bug. It is the logical endpoint. After all, what good is bragging about a rising GDP while so many of our citizens are drowning?

Seth David Radwell is the author of “American Schism: How the Two Enlightenments Hold the Secret to Healing Our Nation,” winner of last year’s International Book Award for Best General Nonfiction. He is a frequent contributor as a political analyst and speaker within the business community and on college campuses both in the U.S. and abroad.


Read More

​A Lebanese girl returns with her family to live amid the ruins of an apartment wrecked by Israeli strikes.

A Lebanese girl returns with her family to live amid the ruins of an apartment wrecked by Israeli strikes in the Houch neighborhood, after being displaced for weeks by war between Israel and the Iran-backed Hezbollah militia that has displaced 1.2 million Lebanese, on April 28, 2026, in Tyre, Lebanon.

Scott Peterson / Getty Images

Please Don't Feed the Warmongers

I was recently catching up with an old friend from my Navy Reserve Officer Training Corps days who told me about some young sailors he knew in Bahrain tasked with intercepting hostile drones. Critically, as highly disciplined professionals, they have become extraordinarily good at it. My friend and I, with over twenty years of active duty service as military officers between us, discussed the extent to which their competence and vigilance are keeping them, and other Americans deployed in the area, alive, all while their leadership in Washington treats war with an increasingly terrifying callousness.

As brave servicemembers risk their lives on the front lines, Trump brags about how much money he’s making as president. It is true that for those invested in the types of industries that thrive during armed conflict, this war in Iran is a windfall. Trump himself invested between $9.7 million and $24.3 million in arms manufacturers and Pentagon contractors in 2025. Why would he end the war?

Keep ReadingShow less
A father voting, with his young son standing by him, watching him.

Citizens cast their vote during the 2026 presidential runoff in Colombia on June 21, 2026 in Barranquilla, Colombia. Ivan Cepeda, candidate for the Pacto Historico party and Abelardo de la Espriella, candidate for the Salvación Nacional, face in a tight runoff to rule Colombia from 2026 to 2030.

Leonardo Castañeda/Getty Images

Colombia’s Election Matters—Especially to Ecuador and the U.S.

In a closely fought election on June 21, conservative outsider Abelardo De La Espriella prevailed over Iván Cepeda, an ally of current leftist president, Gustavo Petro. Central to the electorate’s choice were distinct policy proposals to fight criminality and the drug cartels, who control large swaths of Colombian territory. The policies president-elect De La Espriella will bring to the fight against these issues matter greatly, not only to Colombia, but to neighboring Ecuador and the United States.

Earlier in March, Ecuadorian President Noboa, desperate to gain traction in his own drug war, announced a partnership with the U.S. to conduct joint operations against drug cartels. The partnership quickly went awry. A New York Times investigation of the first strike indicates that what the joint militaries considered a drug camp was in fact a dairy farm, with no drug connection. Then, on March 17, Colombia accused Ecuador of bombing within its territory with U.S. involvement. These incidents resulted in U.S. lawmakers calling for a suspension of joint operations on May 13. Very quickly, the U.S. partnership has reopened the scars of the Plan Colombia era of the early 2000s, where an overly militaristic approach to the drug war funded by the U.S. resulted in human rights abuses and false positives.

Keep ReadingShow less
Adult grandson teaching his grandfather to use laptop, close-up.

Social Security faces a funding crisis by 2032 that could cut retirement benefits by 22%. Learn what's driving the shortfall and how it could be fixed.

Westend61 / Getty Images

Social Security Faces a 2032 Crisis with Deep Benefit Cuts Ahead

A financial tsunami of giant proportions is heading our way. And it is due to arrive in about six years. Policymakers have known about this tsunami for some time, but in June, we found out the Big Wave is taller than anyone knew.

That’s when the Social Security Trustees released their latest report on the financial health of the popular Social Security retirement program. According to the trustees’ report, the outlook is not good – Social Security’s solvency is in danger. By 2032, the Social Security fund will fall short by about $2.5 trillion of the money needed to pay the 52 million American retirees their full retirement benefits. Previously, it was thought that the tsunami would make landfall in 2034, but the finances are deteriorating faster than expected. If no presidential and congressional intervention is mounted, retirees will take about a 22 percent haircut, meaning any senior beneficiary who was receiving $3000 per month will see that chopped to about $2300 per month, a loss of about $8000 per year.

Keep ReadingShow less
 Lego Bricks in child hands

How imagination shapes our future and the American spirit.

Ekaterina79 / Getty Images

The Dreams That Built America—and Will Carry Us Forward

Ah love, let us be true

To one another! For the world, which seems

Keep ReadingShow less