They do not exchange with one another (“Nobody ever saw a dog make a fair and deliberate exchange…with another dog”). They do not have “the facilities of reason and speech” which would enable them to negotiate and make contracts. There, Smith noted that dogs do not have property rights, as do humans (“Nobody ever saw one animal by its gestures and natural cries signify to another, this is mine, that is yours”). We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages”). Further, one of the book’s most famous quotes sits as a lure to attention in the middle of the discussion (“It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. It appears in Book 1, Chapter 2, so even a minimal effort to understand his reasoning would get a reader that far. If, despite that inadequacy, such mischaracterizations of market arrangements can achieve acceptance, it gives those who wish to advance their agendas by violating people’s property rights a lever to dismiss the mountains of evidence in favor of capitalism’s voluntary social coordination as instead a vicious, ugly, harmful process.Īdam Smith’s prebuttal to such assertions comes in the most famous book in economics-his Wealth of Nations-which has remained in print since the year American colonists issued the Declaration of Independence. In fact, the Oxford English Dictionary traces the phrase “dog eat dog” back to 1794, but notes that it is a corruption of the Latin “ canis caninam non est,” which asserted the opposite: that dog does not eat dog. Norm responded, “It’s a dog-eat-dog world, Woody, and I’m wearing Milk-Bone underwear.” Yet, even when it is used in a humorous way, the phrase is striking to me because I don’t know anyone who has ever seen a dog eat another dog, and making an analogy to something that doesn’t happen is a remarkably weak reed to support anything like a logical argument. But my favorite example comes from a Cheers episode, when Woody asked Norm how things were. For instance, several songs include such phrases. Such claims have circulated long enough to become embedded in society. To quote Smith, “By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it.” So I thought I would wander a bit from the well-beaten paths and consider his masterful preemptive rebuttal to decades of claims that voluntary market arrangements (or capitalism, a term used to falsely imply that only the owners of capital gain from the system) represent a dog-eat-dog jungle of a society. I anticipate quite a few articles about Smith’s contributions to economic understanding for his 300th anniversary, such as his articulation of how the “invisible hand” of market interactions can coordinate a society based upon liberty-i.e., private property and voluntary exchange-more effectively than the coercive power of the state. Still others say we don’t know when he was born but give one of those dates as when he was baptized, of which we do have a record.ĭespite that problem, we are certain that this year is the tricentennial of Adam Smith’s birth, making this a very appropriate time to remember him and celebrate his valuable insights. Some sources list his birth as Jwhile others put it on June 5 of that year (due to the use of different calendars). For example, Adam Smith, history’s most famous economist, illustrates such difficulties. But some have unknown birthdays, making that tradition difficult to honor. Important people in history are typically commemorated on their birthdays.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |