|
|
Funny Money: P.J. O'Rourke's take on
"The Wealth of Nations"
 By Mark R. Leffler "Humor is a terrific tool for explaining things, especially when what you're explaining is frightening or dull and complicated." P.J. O'Rourke That quote by O'Rourke was found on his entry in Wikiquote, which contains citations from his eleven books and some waggish swipes and disdainful quips attributed to this concise, and amazingly witty, pundit. Peej, as he was known during his days at the National Lampoon magazine in the 70's, has been credited as having the most quotes in that cyber version of the Encyclopedia Britannica, Wikipedia.
As is evident to anyone who has visited
their local comedy club or seen the current crop of sitcoms on cable,
smart and funny is a rare combination. Smart, funny and to the right of
Jon Stewart is even rarer phenomenon. So it's a pleasure anytime a
book by libertarian icon and humorist O'Rourke appears in print.
His most recent work takes on the
900-plus pages of the economic classic, Adam Smith's "The
Wealth of Nations" published in 1776. The book's full name is "An
Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations." Just
considering that title is enough to make the average reader's head hurt
and reach for the whiskey. Or if they're suburban Republican, scotch or
gin.
"On The Wealth of Nations" is the
first volume of a series intended to introduce great books to a wider
and more general audience. Atlantic Monthly Press has wisely
chosen the only current writer I know of who can explain complicated
economic theory while making the reader chuckle regularly by making
swipes at Britney Spears and Hillary Clinton. If a
spoonful of sugar makes the medicine go down, in the world according to
P.J. a snifter full of brandy and a fine Cuban cigar makes analysis of
Smith's chapters like "Of the Revenue of the Sovereign or
Commonwealth" apprehend able.
"It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages." That most famous quote from the most influential book on Economics in the English language is also at the heart of Libertarianism, and O'Rourke has always been much more comfortable under their tent, where he can smoke and drink and do anything else that's none of your business as long as his wife doesn't find out.
Smith's genius, O'Rourke maintains, was
for understanding what produced wealth (self-interest) and what didn't
(protectionist tariffs and tight government controls). And Smith was
bright enough and humble enough to also know what economists couldn't
know: how to make wealth.
O'Rourke's take on Smith is not an easy read nor should it be.
Although he translates colonial
mercantilism with a wit and panache rarely, if ever, applied to
economics; it's still a book that requires total concentration and
open-mindedness. For Reagan worshipping supply side supporters,
it will explain the ideas behind tax cuts and smaller government. Old
School Liberals such as me must be willing to challenge their
almost pre-natal support for government spending and regulation.
It is refreshing to learn that Smith,
the Patron Saint of the Reagan Revolution if you will, (the man with the
Big Ideas) wasn't dismissive or unappreciative of social justice and
charitable works, he just believed it didn't have much, if anything, to
do with economics and producing wealth. And all the well-intentioned
proposals of Hillary and Bono won't do for the poor what a
booming economy will, according to Peej's interpretation of Smith.
Anyone who exercises understands that to
make a muscle stronger you have to overexert it, break it down and then
it will become stronger. It's been proven that children who are taught
that intelligence isn't a static number you are assigned at birth, but
something that grows with knowledge, do better and their grades improve.
But most people stopped reading
difficult taxing books after they left high school or college. And most
of those few who continue to read, read for entertainment or they buy
political posturing by Bill O'Reilly or Al Franken only to
reinforce what they already believe. It's known as "preaching to the
choir", making arguments to people who already agree. Of course with
O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingram the expression is
literal.
The average Barnes and Noble shopper, if
they find themselves in the Financial section, are just browsing
for that book by that guy from that money show on MSNBC or
"Online Day Trading for Dullards." Most of us know more about the
medical problems of their Border Collie than they do about
finances and economic theory.
Yet money is a central fact of life.
For many it is the central fact of life.
That might be sad or laughable depending
on whether the person is a poor Hungarian single mother or
Donald Trump, who will marry that woman's daughter. But we know very
little about money. Many liberals pride themselves on their ignorance of
financial matters as if it were a Dixie Chick Grammy. And
conservatives become walking proof of the adage about people who know
the price of everything and the value of nothing while also believing
devoutly in many things that are, according to Smith, just Wrong (such
as that foreign trade deficits cripple economies).
What O'Rourke does so intelligently and
hilariously is to demonstrate that with a little effort, even the
densest intellectual forest can be navigated. It helps to have a guide
who is one part H. L. Mencken and one part Mark Twain.
It would be cheating the reader, indeed, not to include some of the more quotable lines from the book. If you use them at your next dinner party or to chat up someone in a coffee house, you should probably send a check to P.J.
It would take someone with the genius of
Adam Smith to explain whether there is value in writing, but it
would produce the one sort of wealth P.J. is always in favor of: His.
"Knowing something about economics does
not alter the fact that economics is unknowable. Economists cannot
predict the future any better than Jennifer Aniston and Donald
Rumsfeld could predict Brad Pitt and Iraq."
You may think you're not the lower ranks because you make a lot of dough, but your lifestyle is an "inconvenience to the society" big time, as you'll find out when I key your Hummer that's taking up three parking spaces." "Brevity may be the soul of wit, but The Wealth of Nations was no joke. Anyway, a taste for brevity is a recent development. Lincoln's Gettysburg Address received a tepid response at Gettysburg. And semiliterate and sub literate types still enjoy a good stem-winder on AM radio or in Hugo Chavez' Venezuela." "Freedom of speech is wonderful if you have something to say. A search of the "blogosphere" reveals that hardly anyone does." "Marginal utility explains why gold, vital to the life of no one except hip-hop artists and fianc�es, is so high priced." |
|
|
|
||