Posted by
Andrews on Tuesday, January 10, 2012 9:52:33 PM
Here it is at last, my quote for yesterday. As I described in "
My Apologies" and "
Stupid Quote of the Day - Update", it has been a long haul getting here. Not, one, not two, but three false starts before I finally got not just a quote I liked, but one which produced an essay worth reading. Still, I promised I would make up the missing essay, and so here it is now. Now if I can only find a quote for today as well.
But we will see shortly what I find for today's quote. As for yesterday, the quote comes from an old favorite of mine (already heard from in "
Stupid Quote of the Day (January 6, 2012)" and "
Stupid Quote of the Day (January 7, 2012)") John Maynard Keynes:
Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most
wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest
good of everyone.
Of course, what is in error about this quote is not the characterization of capitalism, that is actually pretty much accurate, but the fact that Keynes treats it as foolish, and seems shocked that anyone could believe it to be true.
Keynes is being a bit absurd here, the idea that something harmful could be turned to good account is hardly a new idea, nor is it unprecedented in human affairs. For example, when man first began to farm, a single predator was more of a problem than any other. It would hang around the edges of his communities, picking off members of his herds, in rare cases even attacking sick or weak humans, though that was unusual. However, man took that predator, the bane of herdsmen, domesticated it, and turned it against its former brothers. The predator was the wolf and his domesticated descendants we call dogs.
Or, to jump to a more modern example, the earliest of chemical weapons, some variations of mustard gas, had a particularly unpleasant effect, they would inhibit the production of white blood cells. For those suffering from chemical weapons attacks, this simply added to their woes, as, already damaged terribly, it kept their immune response suppressed.However, some doctors noticing this behavior wondered if the same chemicals might not, in cases of leukemia, where excess white blood cells were a problem, provide some relief. And thus modern chemotherapy was born, arising out of the use of a weapon intended to do nothing but kill as many of the enemy as possible.
I could go on, but the point should be painfully obvious. Just because something was seen once as harmful or dangerous doesn't mean that no good can come of it. So why does it seem so impossible to imagine that we could believe a system could exist which would accomplish the same feat?
I won't go into the details here about how capitalism accomplishes this miracle, I described it in great detail in "
Third Best Economy", "
Best Practices and Resistance to Change, Bureaucracy and the Free Market", "
Perverting Self Interest" and "
Planning For Imperfection", so I refer readers there. But I will ask one more question of those who endorse Keynes' position. Which is more incredible? That a system coulde xist which could redirect our selfish impulses into helping others? Or that a handful of men you do not know could make better choices for you than you could make for yourself in every area of your life? Or, even less plausible, that those same men, being given unlimited power and no objective criteria to guide its application, would choose to apply it fairly, evenly and for the general benefit of all?
Of course, we don't even need to bring corruption into the picture, though clearly it is a consideration. ("
The Right People, The Wrong People and "Just Plain Folks"", "
The
Wrong
People") The system itself is set up to fail. Government is designed in such a way that no one can admit failure if they want to continue in office. ("
Fear Driven Enterprises", "
In The Most Favorable Light", "
With Good Intentions", "
Grow or Die, The Inevitable Expansion of Everything", "
Recipe
For
Disaster", "
The
Endless
Cycle
of
Intervention", "
The
Cycle
of
Compassion") And since they will never admit failure, the system will continue to pile failure on failure, until it finally collapses beneath its own weight. And that too is inevitable, as there simply is no way to "rationally" manage an economy. ("
The Limits of "Scientific" Management", "
Greed Versus Evil") And so, despite Keynes' mockery, I think it a far more bizarre proposition that a big, intrusive government will make things better. ("
A New Look At Intervention", "
Inflexibility and Bureaucracy", "
Adaptability and Government", "
Redundancy as a Protective Measure")