Bernard Mandeville wanted economic growth and prosperity as well, but he believed that government needs to play a bigger role in "assuring" economic growth.
Fast forward to the 2012 Presidential election and, when you get down to the core of it all, regardless of what some people might say, that philosophical difference of how much government should dictate was the main issue.
Romney, Republican candidate was an advocate of small government and a more free-market economy, just as Smith was. On the other hand, Obama was in favor of a bigger government, a good example would be the passage of the Affordable Care Act, and more government assurances, just as Mandeville was in some cases.
Who new that in hundreds of years the core political philosophies, that, to this day, divide people,for the most part, really have not changed.
Fast forward to the 2012 Presidential election and, when you get down to the core of it all, regardless of what some people might say, that philosophical difference of how much government should dictate was the main issue.
Romney, Republican candidate was an advocate of small government and a more free-market economy, just as Smith was. On the other hand, Obama was in favor of a bigger government, a good example would be the passage of the Affordable Care Act, and more government assurances, just as Mandeville was in some cases.
Who new that in hundreds of years the core political philosophies, that, to this day, divide people,for the most part, really have not changed.
It's interesting that you see Mandeville as possibly leaning democratic and even supporting the affordable care act. Mandeville is certainly in favor of a type of government intervention, the system known as mercantilism. But the interesting thing about this system is that the government would intervene in part to keep the wages of the poor low because it was believed to maximize labor and to promote trade, which was seen as necessary for national dominance. The same thinking encouraged him to argue against almost all forms of charity. Someone in class suggested that Mandeville resembles Ayn Rand, and in many ways he does. Rand, of course, is a favorite author of Paul Ryan, the last Republican vice presidential nominee. Smith, by contrast, distrusted capitalists and suspected that they would manipulate the market for their own gain and try to suppress the wages of the laboring poor.
ReplyDeleteI think you are certainly right that Mandeville is more interventionist than Smith. But how does this other side of the debate fit into the analogy to modern politics that you draw here?
Tucker,
ReplyDeleteI really like how you tied our readings from class to modern day by tying in the most recent Presidential election. Though political ideology has changed over the past century, many of the right-wing and left-wing economic policies have stayed the same for each camp, and, likewise, the perspectives of Mandeville and Smith have been adopted by modern politicians. Keep up the good analysis!
Cullen Cosco