MARIO VARGAS LLOSA
25
sex, friendship, faith, or love could not be, either, without degrading
them.
In these times of turmoil and wonder, even the most dreaded and
abominable word of all, the most feared word of any kind in twentieth–
century Latin American politics - capitalism - is starting to appear, with,
it is true, much circumspection and squeamishness, in our public vocabu–
lary. Stripped of the frightful, terrible, negative reverberations of the past,
whether we like it or not, objectively, the capitalist system, despite its
limitations and blemishes, has been capable of assuring history's greatest
progress in terms of collective welfare, social security, protection of hu–
man rights, and individual freedom. (This doesn't necessarily mean that,
thanks to capitalism, human happiness has been measurably increased. But
happiness is not something that can or ought to be measured in social
coordinates, only in individual ones. Therefore, as Popper says, happiness
is not a matter incumbent upon governments. Those who insist upon re–
alizing it for everyone - the "holistic" governments such as as those of
Castro, the Shiite
imams
of Iran, or the antidiluvian survivors in the Peo–
ple's Republic of China - are apt to convert their societies into real
hells. Happiness, mysterious and manifold like poetry, is concerned only
with itself and its near ones; there aren't any formulas to produce it or
explanations to spell it out.) If one wants to escape poverty in the
quickest way, in this world where anything is possible, it is necessary
clearly and resolutely to choose the free market, private enterprise, and
individual initiative, as opposed to statism, collectivism, and populist
demagoguery.
Yet there will be grave confusion unless we establish a clear distinc–
tion between genuine capitalism - what I would call liberal, something
we have never really had in Latin America - and those adulterated forms
of "rentism" or mercantile capitalism that until now have germinated in
our countries. The latter system of privileges agreed upon between
political power and influential business groups guaranteed monopolies
and sinecures, safeguarded them from having to compete and to strive to
satisfy consumers' needs. It has been an inexhaustible source of inefficiency
and corruption in our economies. This is the inevitable result when suc–
cess in business is decided not in the marketplace but by an obscure bu–
reaucracy issuing decrees. Such a system deforms both business and the
businessman, who has to devote his ingenuity and his energy not to serv–
ing the consumer but to obtaining privileges from the state. Mercantilism
has
been one of the main causes of our underdevelopment and of our
societies' discrimination against the poor. Mercantilism made justice a
privilege obtained by those with access who had influence or could buy
it; it condemned the poor to creating work and profit in its margins, in
