This is the second in my series of posts on Jonathan Lipow’s book 2023, Public Policy for Progressives.
In “Economics without Apology,” a subsection of Chapter 1, Jonathan addresses his concerns about progressives who reject economics, writing:
Now, sadly, many progressives view economics with great suspicion. Indeed, the emotional hostility toward economics is a textbook example of the Left’s tendency to take default positions without reference to basic ethics or scientific evidence. For example, many progressives believe that Adam Smith, the founder of the field later known as economics, invented capitalism or justified its excesses. This is simply not true. Little Smith’s contribution, The Treasure of Nations, described the features of the capitalist institutional system that had emerged a century earlier to replace feudalism in Europe, and analyzed both their merits and demerits. And far from preaching that greed is “good,” Smith, in Theory of Moral Sentiments – a book that laid the foundation of wisdom upon it The Treasure of Nations it is created – it is strongly associated with “good” and social cohesion and concern for the plight of others.
He then followed up with one of my favorite quotes Theory of Moral Sentiments:
However selfish any man may think he is, there are evidently certain principles in his nature, which interest him in the wealth of others, and make their happiness necessary to him, though he derives nothing from it, except the pleasure of seeing it. Of this kind is compassion or sympathy, the emotion we feel for the suffering of others, when we see it, or are made to think of it in a pleasant way. That we often find sorrow in the sorrows of others, is a matter too plain to require any circumstances to prove; for this feeling, like all the other original passions of human nature, is not confined to the good or the virtuous, though perhaps they may feel it with the greatest wisdom.
He also gets the origin of the term “Dismal Science” right:
Early economists suppressed freedom of religion and conscience, championed women’s rights, and, above all, took a consistent stand against the institution of slavery. All of this long before there was fashion and the cool kids. In fact, the reason why economics is often called the “Bad Science” is that early economists had a bad habit of ruining parties by telling other guests about the deep evils of forced slavery. This nickname was actually coined by Thomas Carlyle, who was trying to empower economists who opposed his “ideal” proposal to restore slavery in the United Kingdom.
I’m not sure about the “dinner parties” part, but you’re right about the originator of the term and Carlyle’s reason for coining the term.
Source link