The Flintstones and the end of capitalism

The problem with anti-capitalist nostalgia

“Make Orwell fiction again.”
—2024 slogan

In the animated world of The Flintstones, Fred and Wilma toil in their Stone Age economy, a primitive system where dinosaurs double as forklifts and dishwashers are literal pelicans. This charmingly prehistoric world serves as a comedic foil to modern life—yet some of today’s green policy advocates seem to envision a future that, stripped of its charm, echoes the economic backwardness of the Stone Ages.

The most striking example comes from Ulrike Herrmann’s book Das Ende des Kapitalismus (The End of Capitalism), where the author argues for a radical overhaul of the global economy. The book achieved significant success on bestseller lists. Upon its release in September 2022, it debuted at number one on the SPIEGEL bestseller list for non-fiction. The book maintained its presence on the bestseller lists for several weeks, reflecting its impact and the public's interest in its themes in Germany.

“I’m German. 16 ago, the EU and US economies were neck and neck. Today, the US economy is 50% larger than the entire EU combined.”
—Ole Lehmann, X, 14 November 2024

Herrmann’s vision, ostensibly inspired by the Greta-my-house-is-on-fire-climate-crisis, takes us to a place where growth is jettisoned, consumption is curtailed, and a quasi-subsistence economy replaces capitalism's modern machinery. In her quest to fight climate change, Herrmann paints a future eerily reminiscent of the Flintstones’ Stone Age existence, albeit without its humour or charm. Her dystopian scenario analysis would even make George Orwell blush.

“Driving through Northeast Germany reminded me of one of those dystopian movies like Mad Max, depicting a dreadful future filled with shortages of all kinds. Looking at the rows of slowly moving or idle wind turbines, grey skies, a large solar field here and there, and crawling traffic… I was wondering what happened to bustling life and major industry which Germany is known for.”
—Lars Schernikau, German entrepreneur and author, 10 November 2024

Herrmann’s green dystopia

Herrmann’s central argument hinges on the incompatibility of capitalism with sustainable ecological practices. She proposes a system where economic growth is abandoned in favour of a steady-state economy. In such a society, individuals consume less, travel less, and produce less—all to reduce environmental degradation. Drawing on the logic of Karl Marx and, more recently, Thomas Piketty, Herrmann critiques the accumulation of capital and wealth as inherently exploitative and unsustainable.

Herrmann’s ideal society is one where people revert to smaller, localized economies, relying heavily on manual labour and community-oriented practices. In her vision, modern conveniences like air travel, cars, and international trade would be largely eliminated. Consumption would be rationed, and the economy would focus on basic needs rather than luxury goods.

“We have wished, we eco-freaks, for a disaster or for a social change to come and bomb us into Stone Age, where we might live like Indians in our valley, with our localism, our appropriate technology, our gardens, our homemade religion—guilt-free at last!”
—Stewart Brand (b. 1938), American writer¹

To an uncritical reader, this might sound plausible. After all, the climate is changing. But Herrmann’s proposals reveal a glaring lack of nuance and practicality. By dismantling capitalism and replacing it with a planned economy of enforced scarcity, she effectively advocates for a regression to a Stone Age-like existence. She took the ESG-woke-DEI movement to the next level.

The problem with anti-capitalist nostalgia

The Flintstones’ economy is a parody of primitive subsistence. Fred Flintstone’s job as a brontosaurus operator and Wilma’s manual household labour reflect an era where productivity and innovation were nonexistent. This is precisely the kind of economy Herrmann inadvertently champions: one where technological progress is stymied, efficiency is sacrificed, and the comforts of modernity are discarded. In her zeal to eliminate the perceived evils of capitalism, Herrmann overlooks a fundamental truth: capitalism’s unparalleled ability to create wealth, innovate, and solve problems.

“The lack of money is the root of all evil.”
—Pun on Biblical proverb attributed to Mark Twain and George Bernard Shaw

Herrmann’s critique of growth fails to acknowledge the transformative power of innovation. Historically, capitalism has proven adept at addressing challenges through technological advancements. Herrmann’s steady-state economy would likely stifle such innovation, leaving society ill-equipped to tackle challenges, including those related to climate change.

“The theory of Communism may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.”
—Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels²

Herrmann’s arguments echo Marxist critiques of capitalism, which portray it as a system doomed to collapse under its contradictions. Yet Marx’s predictions about capitalism’s demise have proven spectacularly wrong. Instead of imploding, capitalism has adapted and thrived, lifting billions out of poverty and creating unprecedented prosperity.

Similarly, Herrmann’s reliance on Thomas Piketty’s work on inequality is fraught with issues. Piketty’s analysis, while influential, has been criticized for cherry-picking data and oversimplifying complex economic dynamics. Like Marx, Piketty and Herrmann fail to account for capitalism’s capacity for self-correction and reinvention.

“Theoretically, planning may be good. But nobody has ever figured out the cause of government stupidity — and until they do (and find the cure), all ideal plans will fall into quicksand.”
—Richard Feynman (1918-88), American physicist³

Both Marx and Herrmann share a romanticized vision of a post-capitalist world—a vision that, in practice, has historically led to stagnation and hardship. The Soviet Union’s command economy, for instance, was a real-world experiment in rejecting capitalism. Far from ushering in a utopia, it resulted in inefficiency, scarcity, and environmental degradation. The divided Koreas are a contemporary experiment.

“AOC Says There Is Too Much Division In Our Country When Addition And Subtraction Are Hard Enough”
—Headline by The Babylon Bee, 21 November 2023

Proponents of the Green New Deal (GND) often echo Herrmann’s themes, calling for a rapid transformation of the economy to combat climate change. While the GND is less radical than Herrmann’s vision, its emphasis on massive government intervention and de-growth policies risks similar pitfalls.

“Imposing controls to stop a price increase is like trying to cure a fever by pushing down the mercury on a thermometer. They work on the symptoms instead of the causes. As a result, controls do not stop price increases; they create consumer shortages, misallocations, and drive the price increases underground into black markets. The consumers wind up far worse off than before.”
—Murray Rothbard (1926-95), American economist⁴

Take, for instance, the push to eliminate fossil fuels entirely within a short timeframe. While well-intentioned, such measures can lead to energy shortages, economic disruptions, and social unrest. A transition to renewable energy is essential, but it must be managed pragmatically, leveraging capitalism’s capacity to innovate rather than dismantle it.

“Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it. “
—Thomas Sowell⁵

The Flintstones’ world offers a satirical glimpse into a low-tech, low-productivity economy. Green policies that ignore market dynamics risk recreating such a scenario, albeit without the whimsical dinosaurs. A society that eschews modernity in favour of subsistence living would not only fail to address ecological challenges but also undermine human progress.

“Fear is an instrument of politics and religion but not science.”
—Gerd Ganteför (b. 1956), German physicist⁶

A voice of reason

German physicist Gerd Ganteför offers a scathing critique of anti-capitalist ecological visions like Herrmann’s. Ganteför argues that climate change cannot be solved by dismantling capitalism but by leveraging its strengths—specifically its technological innovation and market-driven efficiency capacity. He underscores that the global economy’s complexity makes a return to subsistence or steady-state economies not only undesirable but unworkable.

Ganteför, like Bjørn Lomborg, Michael Shellenberger, and Alex Epstein in the English-speaking world, advocates for pragmatic solutions that balance environmental concerns with economic realities. On his YouTube channel, Ganteför highlights the importance of technological advancements such as nuclear energy, synthetic fuels, and carbon capture as critical tools for reducing emissions without undermining prosperity. In his view, Herrmann’s anti-growth stance is a form of ecological defeatism that ignores humanity’s proven ability to innovate its way out of crises.

“Fear is a market… Fearful people are easier to govern.”
—Gerd Gigerenzer (b. 1947), German psychologist and director of the Harding Center for Risk Literacy⁷

By rejecting Herrmann’s alarmism, Ganteför presents a hopeful vision: one where capitalism evolves to meet the challenges of climate change. His critique dismantles the false dichotomy between environmentalism and economic growth, demonstrating that the two can coexist and even reinforce one another. In Ganteför’s framework, the Flintstones’ economy is not an inevitable outcome of green policies but a cautionary tale of what happens when ideology trumps practicality.

“The ideal Earth for environmentalists is the Moon.”
—Drieu Godefridi (b. 1972), Belgian  essayist and author⁸

The Green Reich

In The Green Reich, Belgian philosopher Drieu Godefridi offers a powerful critique of radical environmentalism, which he sees as a new form of authoritarianism. Godefridi argues that the extreme measures proposed by some green ideologues amount to a systematic attack on personal freedoms and economic prosperity.

Central to Godefridi’s thesis is the claim that radical green policies often prioritize ideology over scientific or economic practicality. He points to the tendency of such policies to impose draconian restrictions on industries and individual behaviours, often with little regard for their effectiveness in combating climate change. For Godefridi, this environmental absolutism echoes totalitarian regimes in its willingness to sacrifice individual liberty for the sake of an overarching ideological goal.

“The theoretical system by which environmentalists would seize our societies does not allow them to escape this conclusion: in its principle or its applications, individual freedom must be abolished.”
—Drieu Gedefridi⁹

Godefridi also critiques the moralistic framing of environmental debates, where dissenters are vilified as enemies of the planet. This creates a stifling intellectual climate in which pragmatic solutions are overshadowed by dogmatic adherence to de-growth principles. Like Ganteför, Godefridi advocates for a balanced approach that leverages technological innovation and market mechanisms to address environmental challenges without dismantling the foundations of modern society.

“It is rarely remembered now that socialism in its beginnings was frankly authoritarian. The French writers who laid the foundations of modern socialism had no doubt that their ideas could be put into practice only by a strong dictatorial government.”
—F.A. Hayek (1899-1992), Austrian school economist¹⁰

By emphasizing the dangers of green authoritarianism, Godefridi highlights the importance of preserving freedom and economic dynamism in the fight against climate change. His critique reminds us that environmental policies must be rooted in realism, not ideology and that the solutions to our ecological crises lie in progress, not regression.

Conclusion

Fred Flintstone’s economy works as a cartoon, not as a blueprint for the future. Ulrike Herrmann’s Das Ende des Kapitalismus might appeal to those disillusioned with capitalism, but its prescriptions are both impractical and undesirable. By clinging to Marxist critiques and anti-growth rhetoric, Herrmann and like-minded thinkers risk leading society down a path of economic regression.

Instead of dismantling capitalism, we should focus on harnessing its strengths. The Flintstones may have been ahead of their time when it came to comedic social commentary, but as an economic model, their Stone Age society is best left in the past. Or in Europe, as a Trump voter might say.

Trivia:

“My daughter's immigrant friend, asked during her dissertation defense why she had not dealt with the Marxist interpretation of her topic: "I grew up in Eastern Europe during the Cold War. I do not indulge in recreational Marxism."
—Charles Murray, American political scientist and writer, 17 November 2019

1. Stewart Brand, Whole Earth Catalog, 1968.

2. The Communist Manifesto (1848). Original: “In diesem Sinn können die Kommunisten ihre Theorie in dem einen Ausdruck: Aufhebung des Privat-Eigenthums zusammenfassen.“ Eigenthum is not a typo but an old version of Eigentum, changed at the “Orthographischen Konferenz” of 1901. So the authors of the Communist Manifesto can only be ridiculed for content, not orthography.

3. From a 1963 letter to his wife Gweneth, written while attending a gravity conference in Communist-era Warsaw.

4. Murray Rothbard, Making Economic Sense, Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2006, p. 391-92. First published in 1995.

5. Thomas Sowell, The Thomas Sowell Reader (New York: Basic Books, 2011) 144. Originally in Forbes magazine, "The survival of the left," 8 September 1997.

6. Speech at Swiss Rock Asset Management Investment Symposium, Zurich, 23 October 2024.

7. Angelika Hager, "Psychologe Gerd Gigerenzer: Angst ist ein Markt,” profil.at, 7 March 2020. Translation is my own.

8. Drieu Godefridi, The Green Reich (Texquis, 2019), 66.

9. Ibid, 54.

10. Hayek, F.A. (1944, 2008) “The Road to Serfdom,” New York: Routledge Classics, p. 24. First published 1944 by George Routledge Sons.