|
THE
pioneer of modern economics and the most influential
thinker Scotland ever produced has at last been honored
in his homeland with the first public statue of him in
the United Kingdom. His message of freedom has worked
wherever it has been tried, but it still needs spreading
further.
Adam
Smith’s great and practical An Inquiry into the
Nature and Causes of the Wealth Of Nations (1776) is
one of the most influential books ever written. It
transformed our understanding of economic life from an
ancient to a modern form, based on a completely new
understanding of how human society works.
His
10-foot classical bronze statue was unveiled on July 4
(he was a friend of American independence) on the
historic Royal Mile in Edinburgh by Nobel economist
Vernon Smith (no relation).
Before
Adam Smith, people assumed that the measure of a
nation’s wealth was the gold and silver in its treasury.
Imports were bad because this gold and silver must be
given up in payment. Exports were good because these
precious metals came in. Trade benefitted only the
seller, not the buyer, and a nation could get richer
only if others got poorer.
So
countries erected vast trade barriers and controls to
prevent money going out of the country—taxing imports,
subsidizing exports and protecting domestic producers
(as many still do, hampering the World Trade
Organization’s troubled Doha Round negotiations).

Over 240
years ago Smith showed this was counterproductive.
He
started not with theories but from the fact that in any
free exchange, both sides must benefit. The buyer
profits, just as the seller does, because the buyer
values the cash less than the goods it buys. That’s why
you buy things.
Since
trade benefits both sides, said Smith, it increases our
prosperity just as surely as do agriculture or
manufacture. It is not gold and silver that measure a
country’s wealth but the total of its production and
commerce. Today we call that gross national product.
This
blew a hole through the trade walls that had persisted
for centuries. Leading politicians read the book and
were convinced, cutting back trade restrictions and
subsidies. And that led to the great 19th-century era of
free trade and rising world prosperity.
Smith
told politicians to get out of the way and let people
trade freely: Social and economic harmony did not need
to be planned from the center. It emerged naturally as
human beings struggled to find ways to live and work
with each other. Freedom and self-interest did not lead
to chaos but—as if guided by an “invisible hand”—to
order and concord.
All that
was needed was an open society and free markets, with
rules to maintain that openness and freedom. But those
rules, of justice and morality, would be general and
impersonal, not for the benefit of minority cliques.
It was
not The Wealth Of Nations that first made Smith’s
reputation but a book on ethics, The Theory Of Moral
Sentiments. It argues that the source of human
morality is our natural sympathy for others (today we
might say empathy). By seeing things from other people’s
point of view, we learn how best to live happily
alongside them.
Some
wonder how the self-interest that drives Smith’s
economic system can be reconciled with the sympathy that
drives his ethics. But Smith understood that human
nature is complex. The baker does not supply us with
bread out of benevolence, but nor is it self-interest
that prompts someone to dive into a river to save a
drowning stranger. Self-interested human beings can—and
do—live together, peacefully and productively.
So
The Wealth Of Nations is no endorsement of
dog-eat-dog capitalism, as sometimes caricatured.
Self-interest may drive the economy, but freedom is a
force for good. Smith believes in free markets because
the poor will benefit most from them. Only the rich and
powerful benefit from other systems.
Now
Smith dominates the main street of the city where he
worked and, in 1790, died. Tourists from all over the
world pose for pictures and guides use the prominent
monument as a natural assembly point. Many wonder who
Adam Smith was and why he deserves such prominence.
In an
age when governments claim to be able to solve every
problem, people will find his message refreshing: When
we reject political interventionism and rely on natural
liberty, we find ourselves, unintentionally but surely,
in a harmonious, peaceful and efficient society. |