Intel has been fined $1.45 billion. Yes folks. That’s with a “B.” It is the largest fine that the European Union’s Competition Commission. As James Kanter of the Times reports
Ms. Kroes said Intel had “used illegal anticompetitive practices to exclude its only competitor and reduce consumers’ choice — and the whole story is about consumers.” She said Intel’s practices had “undermined innovation.”
This is the single-largest fine incurred by any company in the history of European commerce. It dwarfs what the commission had previously fined Microsoft–497 million euros. (Intel’s fine in euros is 1.06 billion.) Intel should’ve seen the writing on the wall. They’ve already been fined by similar commissions in South Korea, and been investigated by its Japanese equivalent, though not fined. It is also currently under investigation by the Federal Trade Commission (which is the American equivalent). Now, what is that Intel did? It paid computer manufacturers to not use AMD, it’s main competitor in the microprocessor market.
To be clear, I’m not really interested in this news because it’s funny to think about how many zeroes there are in 1.45 billion, though that is very hilarious. But why I’m sort of heartened by the news is that trade commissions across the world are becoming a lot more vigilant in anti-trust stuff especially in the realm of technology corporations. As the Times reports, the European commission is investigating CISCO, IBM(again), and Google. What is clear is that Europe is clearly at the vanguard of trade law enforcement across the globe. They are, as the article describes them, “activist.” It seems that the US will follow suit under the new administration. Obama’s effect on the anti-trust activity is not really high on the list of talking points for television news programs but I think it should be. And while I fully acknowledge that the Administration’s position on torture, the wars, and other matters are far more pressing, for those of us who are interested in exploding the system of oligarchal capitalism that has reigned, it is hopefuly news to say the least.
One last note, for those who think that I’m putting all my faith in the rhetoric of regulation a la Keynesianism…I’m not. What I’m interested in is the potential political openings of market dynamics for the left. We have simply blamed a reified notion of “the market” for all of society’s ills for far too long, at the cost of glorifying Statism. There must be some room for an anti-Statist leftism in the States, which has proven to be very difficult. We have to ask again whether capitalism is pro- or anti-market. And I think this case with Intel and the financial mess is that, as the great historian of capitalism Fernand Braudel very early on noted, capitalism is, at heart, anti-market.
