Conspiratorial Invisible Hands?
Two Examples of the conspiratorial Use of the IH metaphor
“Invisible hand behind opium poppy cultivation”
“UDF accuses invisible hand for party constant trouble” HERE
“The United Democratic Front (UDF) on Tuesday has accused some hands outside the party for the for the constant disagreements among the members.”
I noted sometime ago these uses of the Invisible Hand Metaphor that may be grammatically correct, though I do not necessarily concur with their attributions.
Internal organizational disputes are prone to conspiracies and the IH metaphor is a powerful, because sinister, figure of speech to denigrate or to damage unspecified other people, who may have quite legitimate interests or grievances.
Attack their alleged or implied secret and invisible identities, which if believed by the intended audience, undermines the substance of their possibly legitimate aspirations for a change of policies or personnel.
I have formed the impression, though so far I have not collected data, that the use of the IH metaphor (inspired by its over-use and wrongful attribution to Adam Smith, as used by modern economists and media publicists) in these conspiratorial roles is resorted to mainly by dictatorial rulers in countries forming the usual suspects and party leaders facing challenges to their authority and the usual privileges of their mismanaging, often corruptly, large state budgets. I have also noted an occasional opposition using the IH metaphor against claims that the people in power are wielding secret campaigns against them.
Those convinced that there is an actual (‘miraculous’) IH working benignly in the economy may wish to reflect on this trend internationally, both to consider how metaphors are meant to be used in English and how their own attributed misuse in economics has drifted away from Adam Smith’s metaphoric use in 1759 and 1776.