"Without competition, the spectacular development of technology that we have seen in the last one hundred years in this country would not have happened"
About this Quote
Raymond’s line reads like a clean civics lesson, but it’s really a defense brief for a particular version of American capitalism: leave markets alone and they will deliver miracles. Coming from the longtime ExxonMobil chief, the claim isn’t neutral history. It’s a strategic framing that turns “competition” into the single parent of progress, and by implication casts regulation, antitrust scrutiny, and climate accountability as obstacles to innovation rather than guardrails for public interest.
The sentence does two kinds of work at once. On the surface, it flatters a national story Americans like: the last century as a parade of gadgets, growth, and ingenuity. Underneath, it quietly launders the messy provenance of that progress. Much of the “spectacular development” of the past hundred years rode on public investment (war mobilization, federal R&D, universities, NASA, DARPA), standards-setting, and government procurement - a mixed economy that doesn’t fit neatly into the morality play of free enterprise.
Raymond also chooses his terms carefully. “Without competition” is absolute and untestable, a counterfactual that can’t be falsified but sounds like common sense. “In this country” narrows the frame to American exceptionalism, sidestepping how global supply chains, foreign research, and international rivalry (including Cold War competition) shaped U.S. technological acceleration.
In the early 2000s, when energy companies were increasingly pressed on climate science and regulatory responsibility, this argument served as a cultural shield: equate the freedom of firms with the future itself. It’s persuasive because it converts a contested political economy into a simple causal story - and asks you to feel grateful before you ask who paid the costs.
The sentence does two kinds of work at once. On the surface, it flatters a national story Americans like: the last century as a parade of gadgets, growth, and ingenuity. Underneath, it quietly launders the messy provenance of that progress. Much of the “spectacular development” of the past hundred years rode on public investment (war mobilization, federal R&D, universities, NASA, DARPA), standards-setting, and government procurement - a mixed economy that doesn’t fit neatly into the morality play of free enterprise.
Raymond also chooses his terms carefully. “Without competition” is absolute and untestable, a counterfactual that can’t be falsified but sounds like common sense. “In this country” narrows the frame to American exceptionalism, sidestepping how global supply chains, foreign research, and international rivalry (including Cold War competition) shaped U.S. technological acceleration.
In the early 2000s, when energy companies were increasingly pressed on climate science and regulatory responsibility, this argument served as a cultural shield: equate the freedom of firms with the future itself. It’s persuasive because it converts a contested political economy into a simple causal story - and asks you to feel grateful before you ask who paid the costs.
Quote Details
| Topic | Technology |
|---|
More Quotes by Lee
Add to List
