Posted by
Andrews on Friday, November 28, 2008 12:48:59 PM
I found what has to be the most bizarre statement ever giving undue credit to the state. I was reading the
Wikipedia page on felt (don't ask why), when I read this sentence:
For a long time, the economy of what is now Canada was based on the fur trade,
the hunting of beaver (and, to a lesser extent, other animals) for the
felt industry in Europe. This led to a very basic colonization,
organized by fur trade companies, until governmental measures were
taken to ensure a real economic and demographic development.
So, first fur trappers came to Canada. Then... nothing. And eventually the fur trappers formed a government and, thanks only to the benevolent power of government, people began to migrate and take up trades other than trapping?
Is it just me, or does this seem to give government a bit more credit than it deserves? Maine (at the time northern Massachusetts) followed a pattern akin to Canada, as did much of the Ohio valley, and even western New York state. Strangely enough, they developed economies without the state mandating them.
Instead, in most of these places, trapping led to the growth of trading towns, which attracted those providing service sot trappers, such as smiths, dry good dealers, prostitutes, bars, and other services. Then people move din to provide services ott he service providers. And farmers arrived as the land was cleared. And so on, and so on, until a full fledged town arose, all without the state lifting a finger.
Was Canada really so different?
Well, more on this later. I just wanted to point out this most absurd sentence, as I thought it would make a few of you smile.
POSTSCRIPT
I know, I know, I have to stop reading Wikipedia. All I do is
gripe about it, and when I don't gripe about Wikipedia,
I gripe about its founders. But I honestly did not set out to find a complaint today. All I was doing was looking up the various means used to manufacture felt. I figured that was a safe enough question that Wikipedia was a good source. No ideological concerns, no political issues, so I thought perhaps I could safely find just what I needed on Wikipedia.
However, the article was more amusing than I expected. Apart from the praise to the All Powerful State I mention above, there are (uncited) claims of felt being found in Turkey which is about 7000 years older than the oldest know sample of felt. And, oddly, a demand for a citation not for the dubious claim above, but for a claim that felt was made by winding fibers against the thigh. (Why someone would doubt that enough to demand a citation, I can't say.)
So, apparently, even safely bland articles such as "Felt" are not free of Wikipedia's quirks and foibles. Which makes me think perhaps I should really just stay away from it. Otherwise I will be filling my blog with nothing but Wikirants and Wikigripes, and I have too many other topics I need to cover for that to happen.