"every side took from Smith what it found convenient, and questioned, or even simply ignored what it did not like." What Smith is saying is that "kindness or benevolence" would be the normal idea of any decent person. This is the default position. But Smith is saying: Let's make an exception. Let's just put it aside for the moment. It seems that one can ignore kindness in certain matters. In these matters, self-interest is sufficient. But Smith never said benevolence of kindness was not the default natural thing people should value.
I strongly disagree with the take on the second Chicago school - and I am referring to the economics of the Wealth of Nations only. As rightly stated, they took what appeared useful to them and dropped those views of Smith which were flat out contradictory to their deregulated free market theory of economic and individual lasissez-faire approach. This is not just stripping Smith of key elements but leads to a gross misinterpretation and distortion. A close and critical reading always requires connecting the dots and interpreting the findings within the context of the whole set of ideas. This mandatorily and indispensibly includes a critical approach to any contradictions as well. The Transformaton problem of Marx is a striking example of that in terms of a critical approach. None of that exists anywhere with the Chicago school. Friedman’s theories co-opted Smith in a way which can not be defended by arguments of ideological needs in the context of time and location and the development of ideas over time. Quite contrary it is illegitimate because it is ideological in the sense that it is utilized to defend reductionist and narrow minded positions which are not tenable in the light of a critical approach. The WoN of Adam Smith of the Chicago school is a perverted reduction of Smith through omissions, wrong readings, contextual distortions, misinterpretations - utilized to serve the purpose of support for an economic theory which itself is mirroring a gross capitalist excercise in preserving inequalities and explotation - the neoliberal experiment of the past 70 years
Really enjoy these book reviews and have bought several my wife is going mental as it’s at least £20 per month
branko my man! How'd ya get my email? I didn't subscribe to you but you came through nevertheless.
"every side took from Smith what it found convenient, and questioned, or even simply ignored what it did not like." What Smith is saying is that "kindness or benevolence" would be the normal idea of any decent person. This is the default position. But Smith is saying: Let's make an exception. Let's just put it aside for the moment. It seems that one can ignore kindness in certain matters. In these matters, self-interest is sufficient. But Smith never said benevolence of kindness was not the default natural thing people should value.
I strongly disagree with the take on the second Chicago school - and I am referring to the economics of the Wealth of Nations only. As rightly stated, they took what appeared useful to them and dropped those views of Smith which were flat out contradictory to their deregulated free market theory of economic and individual lasissez-faire approach. This is not just stripping Smith of key elements but leads to a gross misinterpretation and distortion. A close and critical reading always requires connecting the dots and interpreting the findings within the context of the whole set of ideas. This mandatorily and indispensibly includes a critical approach to any contradictions as well. The Transformaton problem of Marx is a striking example of that in terms of a critical approach. None of that exists anywhere with the Chicago school. Friedman’s theories co-opted Smith in a way which can not be defended by arguments of ideological needs in the context of time and location and the development of ideas over time. Quite contrary it is illegitimate because it is ideological in the sense that it is utilized to defend reductionist and narrow minded positions which are not tenable in the light of a critical approach. The WoN of Adam Smith of the Chicago school is a perverted reduction of Smith through omissions, wrong readings, contextual distortions, misinterpretations - utilized to serve the purpose of support for an economic theory which itself is mirroring a gross capitalist excercise in preserving inequalities and explotation - the neoliberal experiment of the past 70 years
Professor Brank, amzing review t9 have learnt a thing or two about this new book on Adam Smith but Adam Smith himself.
TBF in her interviews since writing the book, Prof Liu does repeatedly stress that he is too nuanced to be interpreted in the way he has been