- “Republican political theories and institutions differed sharply from modern theories and models of international relations. Consequently, the history of international politics, the European system of states and state-formation must be re-conceptualized more in line with historical realities.” (pdf)
- The double life of Adam Smith Kwok Ping Tsang, AdamSmithWorks
- War at the end of history (Ukraine) Adam Tooze, New Statesman
- Taking nationalism seriously (Ukraine) Eteri Tsintsadze-Maass, Duck of Minerva
David Hume and Adam Smith
I recently wrote a short piece for Adam Smith Works, on the influence of David Hume on Adam Smith, in the field of trade and international politics.
You may find it here: https://www.adamsmithworks.org/speakings/van-de-haar-insights-of-david-hume
- Hayekian evolutionism and omitting the nation-state Scott Boykin, JLS
- Progress by consent: Adam Smith was right all along William Easterly, RAE
- Greater Britain or Greater Synthesis? Imperial debates (pdf) Daniel Deudney, RIS
- Bloodletting Whitney Curry Wimbish, North American Review
- How to leave philosophy Greg Stoutenburg, Philosopher’s Cocoon
- Will bourgeoisie ever rule the Chinese state? Branko Milanovic, Global Inequality 3.0
- Adam Smith’s three theories of the British Empire Barry Weingast, SSRN
- Desert and self-defense Irfan Khawaja, Policy of Truth
- Good essay on addiction Judith Grisel, Aeon
- The last of the fucked-up Mohicans Max Norman, LARB
- Adam Smith’s colonial politics Donald Winch, Cahiers d’économie politique
- Unsolved mysteries Daniel Barnum, Bat City Review
Some Monday Links
Madison’s Consistency on the Bill of Rights (National Affairs)
Reading Wealth of Nations and Meeting Adam Smith (The Hedgehog Review)
Not everyone (Verfassungsblog)
Philosophers Rebuild Society (Existential Comics)
- The miseducation of America’s elites Bari Weiss, City Journal
- Fear, loathing, and surrealism in Russia Emina Melonic, Law & Liberty
- Cancelling Adam Smith Brian Micklethwait, Samizdata
- Artificial Intelligence and humanity Kazuo Ishiguro (interview), Wired
- Adam Smith’s Theory of Moral Sentiments Pannill Camp (interview), JHIBlog
- Sunday Poetry: Rüstow vs. Mises Alex Albrecht, NOL
- Millennial burnout in America Anne Helen Petersen (interview), Vox
- The Dunning-Kruger Effect on stature Mary Lucia Darst, NOL
- What is the human being? Jon Stewart, Aeon
- Premature imitation and India’s flailing state (pdf) Rajagopalan & Tabarrok, TIR
- Is it time to strike back at empire? Tony Barber, Financial Times
- Adam Smith: a historical historical detective? Nick Cowen, NOL
- Why Adam Smith was right Branko Milanovic, globalinequality
- Understanding the war in Kenya and Ethiopia Dalle Abraham, Africa is a Country
- Propaganda and art in Iran today Amir Ahmadi Arian, NYRB
- The crypto state Bruno Maçães, City Journal
- The libertarian personality Arnold Kling, askblog
- The decline of the West – new and improved Josef Joffe, American Interest
- When a civilization retreats Nick Nielsen, The View from Oregon
- Cents and sensibility Chris Dillow, Stumbling & Mumbling
- What kind of war was the Second World War? Nick Nielsen, The View from Oregon
- The politics of colonial reparations (Tunisia) Al-Jazeera
- The UK’s economy is heading for disaster Chris Dillow, Stumbling & Mumbling
- How social skills improve group performance Deming & Weidmann, NBER
The Vexing Libertarian Issue of Transition
I have appointed myself an old sage to the world. When your knees are creaky and every snotty eighteen-year-old treats you patronizingly, the least you can do to compensate is award yourself wisdom. Anyway, long story short, it’s a good excuse to spend much time on Facebook. I feel I am rendering a public service. I am continuing my teaching career there. It’s unpaid but the conditions are much better and all the students actually want to be in class.
Of course, it’s also true that Facebook is addictive. It’s not a bad addiction. For this old guy, it’s almost incredible to have frequent conversations with an MD in Pakistan, my niece in India, an old girlfriend in Panama, a young friend’s wife in Japan, and of course, many different kinds of French people. I even have a Facebook friend who lives in the mountains of Algeria; we have lively talks in French. Recently, a young woman who described herself as a Myanmar village girl reached out. (I know what you are thinking but if she is really one of those internet sex trolls, I salute the originality of her marketing strategy.) At all times a day and night, I have at least one Facebook friend who is not asleep. It’s pleasant in these days of confinement.
The same confinement, perhaps, slows me down and makes me more likely to tally up everything. As a result, a new impression has pierced my consciousness. Expressing contempt for democracy seems to be in vogue among people who identify as libertarians (with a small “l,” big “L” Libertarians have nearly vanished from my world. It could just be me.) This contempt reminds me that I have been asking the same question of libertarianism for now about fifty years, all with not much success.
I refer to the question of transition. I mean, what is it supposed to look like moving from wherever we are, in terms of governance, to a society with a drastically diminished government interference in individual lives? I have been receiving evasive answers, answers that don’t make even superficial sense, and swift escapes effected by changing the subject.
Let me say right away that I am not looking for a crushing reading assignment (a common punitive, passive-aggressive maneuver among intellectuals). Mine is a simple question. One should be able to sketch a rudimentary answer to it. Then, it would be up to me to follow through. Then, no excuse!
To my mind, there are only two extreme transition scenarios. One is the Somali scenario. The state falls apart under its own incapacity to limit internal aggression. It disappears or nearly so. When the point is reached where government authority extends only three blocks from the presidential palace to the north and east, and one block from the south and west, you pretty much have a stateless society. Goal reached!
The second scenario is a gradual change from the current “democratic” arrangements. I mean by this fair and reasonably honest elections followed by a peaceful transfer of power. I mean freedom of expression. And, disturbingly, this also includes courts of law. This is disturbing because courts without enforcement of their decisions are not really courts. This fact implies the threat of coercion, of course.
Now, I can imagine a situation like right now with the Corona Virus epidemic when governments (plural) demonstrate on a large scale their inability to do the obvious. The citizens often react to this sort of demonstration by asking for better and more government. However, it does not have to be that way. The combination of wide communication through the internet and – like now – of enforced leisure – may switch the dial. It’s conceivable that large numbers will get the idea that government that is at once heavy-handed, expensive, and incapable is not a good answer to much of anything. With that scenario one can imagine a collective demand for less government.
Strangely, this sort of scenario may be on display in France now, as I write. Well, this is not so strange after all. A deeply statist society where govt absorbs 55% of GDP and up may be exactly the best place to figure out that more government is not the answer. From this thought to the idea that less government may be the answer there is but one step. My intuition though is that it’s a big step. That’s because few people understand markets. No one but a handful of college professors seems to have read the moral philosopher Adam Smith. (Tell me that I am wrong.)
So, I would like for those who are more advanced than I am on this issue of transition (a low bar) to engage me. I am not interested in the same old ethical demonstrations though. Yes, the state is an instrument of coercion and therefore, evil. I already know this. In the meantime, the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States does a fair job of protecting my freedom of speech, my freedom, of thought, my freedom of religion. I am not eager to leave this behind for the complete unknown. Are you? Why? How?
Be Our Guest: “Government: The Great Post-Christian Swindle”
Jack Curtis is back as our guest, and with a thoughtful vengeance:
It is no coincidence that Reformed Judeo-Christian culture has led the explosion of human progress in recent centuries; it both set up the church as society’s and government’s visible conscience, and by reversing sovereignty from king to people, freed incalculable individual effort into the more productive directions celebrated by Adam Smith in his The Wealth of Nations. The first provided a foundation for the reduced corruption and enhanced public trust that advance economic progress; the second accelerated human achievement. Tales of extraordinary human accomplishment have always centered upon motivated individuals, ordered serfdom has never been considered very productive and slavery, least of all. This is a reality typically brushed off by those selling the idea that alterations of government structure can be used to alter innate human behavior. The idea however, remains an enduring political swindle enshrined among public educators naturally interested in producing complaisant citizens for their employer.
Read the rest, and don’t forget to add your own thoughts. As always, feel free to Be Our Guest…