Anarchy and Economy p2: Adam Smith

[greenghost2008]

where anywhere has an anarcho-capitalist called adam smith a market anarchist? link please.

[GodOfTheInternets]

Anarchists are socialists. Libertarians are anarcho-communists. STOP TAPING WORDS bro.

[N0g0dzN0masterz]

Adam Smith is hardly a Hero for Anarchist. Also the invisible hand quote you need to read the hole quote. "By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention". in short local economy not global.

[JohnColt]

Your explanation of the invisible hand is incorrect. The invisible hand refers to idea that, in the market place, one inadvertently does good for others through the pursuit of one's own personal goals.

[mjuslen]

Since when is Adam Smith a hero of Anarchists? Of course he is a hero to free markets, but there are much more prominent economists who advocated little or no government intervention in markets. You make it sound as if anarchists and libertarians worship Adam Smith. No, they respect him because he was a prominent figure who inspired many free market economists. Milton Friedman was a major admirer of Adam Smith and he was no anarchist nor did he ever claim to be a libertarian.

[JohnColt]

@mjuslen Milton certainly did claim to be a libertarian.

[dons123111]

Notice how this video doesn't cite any pages or chapters. Adam Smith was against Tariffs and was a critic of Central Planning and Govt central power prefering local economics. These are Libertarian Ideas. True that Adam Smith was not a full Anarcho -Capitalist, That came later with Cobden and then Menger. Most Libertarians advocate the findings of Hayek and Mises and their worldy philosophy. Beware of this Fabian Socialist video who has twisted Adam Smith into their own.

[niemand2099]

the central governments don't get how free money destroys any market because in the real economy no sane investor or seller would give something for free or sell at 0. It's about multiplying money and that's how everybody benefits in the end because you got spend that money and pay somebody else. And one can't excempt socialism within a free market economy without crashing it eventually

[peterfdrucker]

Interesting post. Not sure what a "market anarchist" is, though. However, I think the video is wrong to suggest pointing these things out to Smith-worshippers. It's a bit like trying to tell a fundamentalist about the stuff in the bible that contradicts their views. The stuff the video points out about Smith is interesting and worth knowing - but tell it to people who are "on the fence" about laissez-faire. Don't waste time with ideologues. That's my 2¢.

[GodOfTheInternets]

Nobody claims that Adam Smith was an anarchist, merely that anarcho-Capitalists sometimes use some of his statements as an argument for anarcho-Capitalism. Evreyone uses arguments "borrowed" from another ideology or ideoloque. Antionnio Gramsci (marxist) was influenced by Giovanni Gentile (fascist)! Anarchism btw also doesn't mean chaos or even lawlessness, it means that there is no monopoly of force (ie the state).

[DreadLaw2]

This is hilarious. You're only about 60 years out kid. Hayek, and Rothbard are far more popular among ethical people.

[djyankee251]

who cares if Smith and market anarchists don't completely agree. Doesn't mean market anarchists aren't right in citing where Smith was right about self-regulation.

i wouldn't say he is their "number 1 hero" as there are and have been economists and political philosophers who are or were actual anarchists

[Flarinon]

Libertarians also believe that the government is only involved if it benefits the people or protects them. That can be compatible with the ideals of Smith, but not every idea can be compatible as you have pointed out in your video.

[thib565]

THANK YOU SO MUCH! First time that i hear someone agreeing with me on Smith. I try to convince all those neo-liberals who only read Hayek and lines of Smith that he was not oppose to regulation and was not a crazy no intervention in the market at any cost. TY. This is why Smith is my number one economist, philosopher, politician, his book was a master piece. Marx his the second because he used a lot of Smith and Ricardo ideas .

[WestRiverHillBilly]

I do agree, though, that Adam Smith was not an Anarchist, nor would he support anarcho-capitalist philosophy.

[WestRiverHillBilly]

While it is true that Adam Smith felt that it was fair that the wealthy pay a larger portion of taxes, hence a progressive tax system, he did not advocate taxing the fruit of ones labor, income. Adam Smith felt a proportionally higher tax rate on luxury goods would ensure that the wealthiest also paid a proportionally larger amount of the taxes while leaving the incentive to be productive, one's income, alone.

[oiuoiu988]

you have no clue...

[oneyedo]

ron paul is fucked up

[nosafeharbor]

One can point to Smith's invisible hand without being "mistaken." The invisible hand is simply an easy way to explain self regulating markets to people.

The only way your video is relevant is if someone is using Adam Smith to argue directly against the specific points you made. I think that would make it rarely relevant.

[Lee122AP]

Hes got Huge Eye Balls!

[birdlives2000]

Adam Smith was in favor of public institutions that are greatly beneficial to society but otherwise would not be able to be funded by small groups of people. He advocated for institutions of education, roads, and those that facilitate commerce. Yes it may not go with an anarchist view but it still fits in with capitalism

[cris750]

" ...led by an INVISIBLE HAND to promote an end which was no part of his intention...By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it." ( Book IV - Of systems of political Oeconomy, Ch. II ' Of restraints upon...' , 7th Paragraph , end of 4th sentence to 6th sentence ) "Invisible Hand" connected with "MORAL CAUSES" !

[cris750]

By the way, Adam Smith was anti-war. This would highlight my point that he meant MORAL CAPITALISM. Read "Wealth of Nations" p. 1049 - 'Of Public Debts' in the paragraph that starts with ...' The same commercial state of society which, by the operation of MORAL CAUSES,...." He stated this after he explained how the Monarch of his time was using misusing the resources for war!!! than he continues with the above paragraph and mentions """MORAL CAUSES....""" !!!!

[cris750]

The author of this vid missed the point of the view of "invisible hand". It was used to signify mostly Moral Capitalism. Why? Adam smith's views are part of his previous book - The Theory of Moral Sentiments.

[cris750]

Again, "The Sole use of money is to circulate consumable goods. By means of it,provisions,materials,and finished work,are bought and sold,and distributed to their proper consumers."( p.382,Ch.3 - 'Of the accumulation of Capital,or of productive and unproductive Labour' or Paragraph 20 ) LOOK at at time when there is now a Recession/Depression it would be wise to give a substantial amount money to the people until the market reach an equilibrium !!!

[snoopyflick]

So true, mostly because Adam Smith was an idiot, well at least wrong on many things in economics. Ludwig von Mises, Rothbard, Hoppe, and other great Market Anarchist were right, and not crazy marxist believing in the labor theory of value. Ohh and Lysander Spooner was okay too, "OKAY" not great or refined enough though.

[Mickmars90]

He was not an idiot. He was never into Laissez Faire economics. Is that why you call him an idiot? I am an Austrian School advocate however, but I recognize the influence of Adam Smith in laying the intellectual foundations for the development of free market capitalism.

[KushinLos]

Have you read any Benjamin Tucker? He pointed out that Adam Smith didn't go far enough in his views, and while I admit that it would not surprise me to find that some in the ultra-liberty side may not know of this, it isn't really all that surprising and the invisible hand still holds water. Instead of Smith's arguments being the be all and end all, it is important to see what has come since. Anarchists, libertarians and free market capitalists are more Adam Smith than Adam Smith ever was.

[johnbbjf]

you say at the end "government regulation is acceptable as long as there are reasonoble grounds to produce a beneficial result. What problem couldn't be solved by a reasonable government problem. none...but do any reasonable government programs work? They all start out as reasonoble programs and grow into self interested, self promoted, bureaucratic nightmares full of incompetent workers. Oh I guess there is one thing does better than any private corporation...genocide

[amgervinus]

I'd like to say, A.Smith was an idiot..sorry, but that's the truth.

[gerry20009]

Then overcome him, what have you done?

[PkerShizerX]

oi... stop dissing our 20 pound note... XD lol

I just found out today that adam smith is on 20 pound note XD lol

[NachitoXeneize]

I don't agree. You say it yourself '..A.S. don't agree or support with RADICAL views..". That means extreme positions. However he did defend free market.

So I believe you do can quote him to defend you market anarchiest o capitalism ideas.

Good job though.

Cheers from Argentina

[dechha1981]

I'm with Adam Smith. Rich people actually pay LESS tax than poor prople do even though they can afford to pay allot moretax than poor people can. I think everyone should just pay 10% of their income. That way, the poor pay allot less but the rich pay WAY more.

[iluminatr462]

you didn't pay attention. adam smith supports progressive taxation, not a flat tax. progressive taxation means the more you make the higher the percentage you pay. a flat tax is actually regressive, because 10% of a poor person's wealth has a lot greater impact on them than 10% of a wealthy person's. the way it is now the poorest don't even pay taxes because of the exemption. your proposel would mean the impoverished would have to start paying.

[SuperAtheistBrothers]

Flat tax isn't technically regressive. Our tax (in America) gives so many loop holes and exemptions the bulk of taxes fall on the poor and middle class. Thank you 6,000 page tax code for giving the rich advantages :]

A flat tax would guarantee that the rich pay their taxes full on, but it would also be a great incentive for anyone who wants to stride forth. I know plenty of people who refuse to take raises and promotions because of stupid tax brackets. Our tax code is so broken...

[greegomileego]

So what? This isn't attacking free market theory though, just that Adam Smith wasn't a perfect market anarchist. Anyway, most free market advocates that I know study a lot more Mises, Rothbard, Hayek, etc than Smith.

[aresius90]

" Adam smith was against any and all government regulation in the economy."

That's not incorrect but, incomplete. Adam Smith was against government regulation "in terms of strict market issues", but Smith, like Neotropic exposed, wrote that government must assure market's physical safety by the introduction of police forces and so on. If not, capitalists would never invest on the market cause it's unsafe for them and, most importantly, for their money ( that might be stolen,etc.) srry4english

[panousis]

Well you talk about anarchy. Anarchy is about all about a simple thing. Not having unjustified unwilling use of force-authority.So it goes from Goverments(or collective) to Private(individualist) types of authority.

If this "authority(force)" exists then the people by their reactions(as individuals or as a collective) will ask for a justification.

Individualism look only one way, so it cannot be sited as "truly" anarchistic thinking.Competition has to do with "force"...Usually unjustified.

[solarpanel420]

"it is true that Adam amith was opposed to certain types of regulation" hahaha. thats the biggest understatement I have ever heard. Adam smith was against any and all government regulation in the economy. He said that it was absolutely impossible to allocate money in a way that would be more beneficial than the way the free market would have otherwised allow. You really need to read that book again man.

[neotropic9]

I guess you didn't watch the whole video.

[solarpanel420]

oh no i did.

I guess you didnt read the whole book.

[felipmante]

Adam Smith never studied psicology, marketing, if you don't understand the human hard, the human priorities, you never will understand the real economy, Keynes start to undestand the politic and social nessecitis.

[stratvic]

Adam smith does not support "all" Market Anarchist" views. This does not discredit all or any of Admam Smith views, nor does it discredit all or any of Market Anarchists views. What it does point out is an inconsistency in a philosophers views with a school of philosophy. Not only is this not unusual it is an expected norm in philosophical debate. Your points here are interesting because they highlight differences but you failed to exploit those differences with reason.

[Shezmu]

"if someone is to agree with a component of smith's arguments, they are not obligated to the whole of his system or dependent on denfense of each particular -- this isn't like arguing the inerrancy of the bible."

That sums up my opinion as well.

[GrowthSpiral]

adam smith was a capitalist, or what the first person who embodied that philosophy no?

[kaksonen]

though there is obvious merit in pursuing this line of reasoning, i think this is a poor argument for two reasons. you are too liberal with your use of anarchist in a global sense while attacking its individual meronyms, superstrates, and companion ideologies. also, if someone is to agree with a component of smith's arguments, they are not obligated to the whole of his system or dependent on denfense of each particular -- this isn't like arguing the inerrancy of the bible.

[neotropic9]

I don't think you have appreciated what I am trying to do with this series. The point is to break up the entire debate into easily digestible pieces. This video was intended for a very small and very specific purpose: to show that Adam Smith himself does not support market anarchy. That was it. I think you will agree that goal was accomplished. I will leave other lines of reasoning (and pursuing nuances etc) to other videos.

[MatthewLeee]

he really never did support it, his ideas led to the Marxian theories of value, which of course, is diametrically opposed to the free market.

[Slimdawgc]

You're right; Marx especially liked Smith's labour theory of value.

[MatthewLeee]

he found it very useful.

[justsmit]

"his ideas led to the Marxian theories of value, which of course, is diametrically opposed to the free market."

Smith's ideas were not in opposition to free markets, and his ideas also helped lead the way towards marginalism.

Reading your post, it almost sounds like Marx's views are the next logical step after Smith, which is not necessarily true.

I know that may not have been your intention, Mathew.

[MatthewLeee]

no, but thanks for pointing that out.

I was trying to show that Although smiths ideas were not opposed, Marx's were.

[Nintendomanwill]

That's all well and good but what you're ignoring in Smith, what I would call the vital lesson of the WoN, is that law is not what creates wealth. True, that doesn't make him an anarchist. BUT do you think that the State in the 18th Century hampered the market as it does now? By today's standards Smith WAS near anarchism. Seriously. Study British legal history. Common Law virtually IS anarcho-capitalism. He railed against any & all Mercantilism so Central Banking & fiat currency would shock him.

[erkd1]

Great video, although you forgot monopolization.

[neotropic9]

That's for a later video.