Posted by
Andrews on Monday, June 01, 2009 6:19:03 PM
During my vacation I started reading again the first volume of Gibbon's
Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. It is one of my favorite explorations of the weaknesses and strengths of an autocratic government, as well as just a fun read. I don't agree with all of Gibbon's theses, but it is still enjoyable.
What I did not expect to find was any economic insight. However, while reading a section I had forgotten from the last time I read it, I found a very eloquent statement of a point I have often made, the argument that by simply spending their wealth the "idle rich" help not only advance mankind, but to even out the inequities of wealth.
Such refinements, under the odious name of luxury, have been severely arraigned by the moralists of every age; and it might perhaps be more conducive to the virtue, as well as happiness, of mankind, if all possess the necessities, and none of the superfluities, of life. But in the present imperfect condition of society, luxury, though it may proceed from vice or folly, seems to be the only means that can correct the unequal distribution of property. The diligent mechanic, and the skillful artist, who have obtained no share in the division of the earth, receive a voluntary tax from the possessors of land; and the latter are prompted, by a sense of interest, to improve their estates, with whose produce they may purchase additional pleasures.
I was thrilled to find such a brilliant restatement of a point I often make, but not so happy that it made my point better than I ever did.
Well, there is always the next essay. Sooner or later I will get it right.
POSTSCRIPT
Gibbon also provides a single quote which struck me as quite informative:
His reign is marked by the rare advantage of furnishing very few materials for history; which is, indeed, little more than the register of the crimes, follies, and misfortunes of mankind.
As some of my favorite presidents (eg. Cleveland) served in times over which history classes regularly elide, I find it amusing to think that history's habit of ignoring them is, more than anything else, a proof to the quality of their governance.