The Death of a Monopoly (April 1997 | Volume: 48, Issue: 2)

The Death of a Monopoly

AH article image

Authors: John Steele Gordon

Historic Era: Era 10: Contemporary United States (1968 to the present)

Historic Theme:

Subject:

April 1997 | Volume 48, Issue 2

When MCI, the company that broke the monopoly that AT&T had on long-distance telephony in the United States and Canada, was sold recently, it went for $22 billion. That’s not bad for an operation that, less than three decades ago, was having trouble borrowing $35,000. It is perhaps the greatest example of creative destruction in the modern history of capitalism.

Joseph Schumpeter, the great philosopher of capitalism, coined the phrase "creative destruction." He was referring to the never-ending restructuring that takes place in a free-market economy as new technologies replace old ones and new companies outcompete their more established rivals. This is often a very painful process on the microeconomic level, as people lose their jobs and investors lose their capital. Indeed, the phenomenon of creative destruction played no small part in the rise of the left in the late nineteenth century as means were sought to avoid the pain without losing the benefits of a technologically progressive economy.

 

But, after numerous experiments with non-capitalist and mixed economies in the twentieth century, creative destruction has turned out to be indispensable at the macro-economic level. First, because the government owns the means of production in a socialist economy, political considerations, not economic ones, have always dominated decision-making, and politicians will always try to preserve what is over fostering what might be. After all, what is votes; what might be does not.

Second, socialist economies have relied on monopolies to avoid “wasteful” competition and provide economies of scale. But all monopolies, whether owned by “the people” or by shareholders, tend to become fat, lazy, and uninnovative. Again, what is becomes heavily favored over what might be.

The inevitable result, from democratic, semicapitalist Britain in the years after World War II to the unspeakable tyrannies of communist North Korea and Albania, has always been economic stagnation, lagging technology, and increasing relative poverty.

But, even in the most capitalist countries, there have always been what economists call “natural monopolies.” These usually involve situations where such a heavy investment would be needed to provide competition that it would raise the costs above any possible savings. Electrical utilities are a typical example.

The long-distance market in North America was, only twenty years ago, the greatest natural monopoly on earth. Today, however, it is a ferociously competitive industry, as the endless stream of television commercials demonstrates. What happened? Most important, the development of microwave transmission technology—one of the myriad spinoffs from the invention of radar—made it possible for someone to compete with AT&T without duplicating Ma Bell’s vast landline infrastructure. This broke the natural monopoly. All that was needed thereafter was to break the regulatory one. That was not easy, for the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) was used to working closely with AT&T and had a natural tendency to favor it. Ironically, however, AT&T made, two decades apart, two trivial mistakes that each in no small way helped end the monopoly.

First, an elephant named AT&T tried to