Good soldiers, bad causes
Dr. Kapital with three Tweets today:
1) "Hayek was not a conservative, as he understood the word, and would have no truck with the mullahs who today preach in his name."
2) "For Hayek and Hirschman conservatism meant resistance to change, preservation of institutions. US conservatism is precisely the opposite."
3) "Adam Smith, same thing. Two examples: he thought markets should be regulated, and warned of the corruption of Parliament by business."
posted by The Front at 9:05 PM
2 Comments:
Danke, Doktor Kapital, für das Daran erinnern, dass Adam Smith zwei Bücher schrieb.
Niemand sollten von "The Wealth of Nations" veranschlagen lassen werden, ohne "The Theory of Moral Sentiments erste zu lesen.
Point taken, and my venom against conservatives would be greatly reserved if these had any relationship at all to the gainsaying country club fascists of today: but the problem of Hayek's essay was the date. Writing this precious, interesting, backward looking little essay at the great building of the civil rights movement- without mentioning the overwhelming issue of state power vs. individual liberty and the relationship at the time- tells me of classical liberalism's tremendous limitations, it's inability to serve its own stated ends of liberty. It mentions whiggery a dozen times, and nothing of Dr. King, at a moment in history when American citizens are being beaten and killed and lynched over their right to vote.
It was still a mechanistic ideology, an Enlightenment fantasy that if you just tune everything perfectly the mechanism will run forever.
I'm kinder on Smith, lit by the spirit of a scientist.
Post a Comment
<< Home