Adam Smith on Government
I came across the following passage while re-reading Adam Smith’s Moral Sentiments. It refers to his comments on the character of civil governments, both those “fitted either to promote or to disturb the happiness both of the individual and of the society”, which may cast light on the vexed question of the degree to which Adam Smith approved or disapproved of the institutions of civil government – the State – as believed by many who preach his hostility to these institutions.
“The characters of men, as well as the contrivances of art, or the institutions of civil government, may be fitted either to promote or to disturb the happiness both of the individual and of the society. The prudent, the equitable, the active, resolute, and sober character promises prosperity and satisfaction, both to the person himself and to every one connected with him. The rash, the insolent, the slothful, effeminate, and voluptuous, on the contrary, forebodes ruin to the individual, and misfortune to all who have any thing to do with him. The first turn of mind has at least all the beauty which can belong to the most perfect machine that was ever invented for promoting the most agreeable purpose: and the second, all the deformity of the most awkward and clumsy contrivance. What institution of government could tend so much to promote the happiness of mankind as the general prevalence of wisdom and virtue? All government is but an imperfect remedy for the deficiency of these. Whatever beauty, therefore, can belong to civil government upon account of its utility, must in a far superior degree belong to these. On the contrary, what civil policy can be so ruinous and destructive as the vices of men? The fatal effects of bad government arise from nothing, but that it does not sufficiently guard against the mischiefs which human wickedness gives occasion to.” (TMS, IV.2.1: p 187)
In my opinion, the above paragraph (expanded in the rest of his chapter) points to a typical Smithian stance; specifically, he regarded the institutions of civil government as justified and necessary, from their first appearance in the “Ages of Shepherds and Agriculture” [LJ(A) i.27:p 14] through to his time. This historical view left him much room for critical comment of “the mischiefs which human wickedness gives occasion to” in all its institutions, including those in the ‘Age of Commerce’.
Those who believe governments of a kind that is compliant with their politics do no wrong, and those who believe that markets, compliant with their ideology, are always right or are always wrong, may wish to reflect that the common factor in all civil governments and all modes of subsistence in history and today, was and is the presence of human beings with their capacity to be among “the prudent, the equitable, the active, resolute, and sober” or among “the rash, the insolent, the slothful, effeminate, and voluptuous”, or some mixture of the two extremes.
Adam Smith did not take sides, nor blind himself to the triumph of hope or despair over historical observation and scepticism
“The characters of men, as well as the contrivances of art, or the institutions of civil government, may be fitted either to promote or to disturb the happiness both of the individual and of the society. The prudent, the equitable, the active, resolute, and sober character promises prosperity and satisfaction, both to the person himself and to every one connected with him. The rash, the insolent, the slothful, effeminate, and voluptuous, on the contrary, forebodes ruin to the individual, and misfortune to all who have any thing to do with him. The first turn of mind has at least all the beauty which can belong to the most perfect machine that was ever invented for promoting the most agreeable purpose: and the second, all the deformity of the most awkward and clumsy contrivance. What institution of government could tend so much to promote the happiness of mankind as the general prevalence of wisdom and virtue? All government is but an imperfect remedy for the deficiency of these. Whatever beauty, therefore, can belong to civil government upon account of its utility, must in a far superior degree belong to these. On the contrary, what civil policy can be so ruinous and destructive as the vices of men? The fatal effects of bad government arise from nothing, but that it does not sufficiently guard against the mischiefs which human wickedness gives occasion to.” (TMS, IV.2.1: p 187)
In my opinion, the above paragraph (expanded in the rest of his chapter) points to a typical Smithian stance; specifically, he regarded the institutions of civil government as justified and necessary, from their first appearance in the “Ages of Shepherds and Agriculture” [LJ(A) i.27:p 14] through to his time. This historical view left him much room for critical comment of “the mischiefs which human wickedness gives occasion to” in all its institutions, including those in the ‘Age of Commerce’.
Those who believe governments of a kind that is compliant with their politics do no wrong, and those who believe that markets, compliant with their ideology, are always right or are always wrong, may wish to reflect that the common factor in all civil governments and all modes of subsistence in history and today, was and is the presence of human beings with their capacity to be among “the prudent, the equitable, the active, resolute, and sober” or among “the rash, the insolent, the slothful, effeminate, and voluptuous”, or some mixture of the two extremes.
Adam Smith did not take sides, nor blind himself to the triumph of hope or despair over historical observation and scepticism
Labels: Smith On Government
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home