Archives: September 2009

John Derbyshire’s hard-headed realism

Paul Gottfried reviews John Derbyshire’s latest book We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism, which appears to make a secular, empirical case for “hard-headed realism.”

Although We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism would appear to be a light read, brimful of anecdotal asides, first impressions can and, at least in this case, do deceive. Derbyshire’s work is fraught with carefully researched information about the failures of public education, the egalitarian assumptions informing our educational-political establishment, the feminization of American society, and the increasing irrelevance of any form of culture except for crude entertainment to American life.

Gottfried then contrasts Derbyshire’s science-based perspective with the religious and cultural (100% environmentalist) views that dominate today’s conservative and liberal elites:

Derbyshire cites Charles Murray’s research in underlining the effects of immutable differences among individuals and ethnic groups. But his tone is very different from Murray’s, insofar as he does not follow Murray in Real Education by patting public educators on the head for making modest gains with cognitively weak students. He is full of obvious contempt for the egalitarian aims and crass hypocrisies of the “edbyz” crowd, and in this respect he seems to have taken his lead from Brimelow’s battle against mendacious, grasping teachers’ unions in The Worm in the Apple.

Derbyshire’s perspective seems to call for a revival of what the conservative author Sam Francis has called counter-modernism, a worldview shaped by the secular and scientific views of the Enlightenment but without  its naive egalitarian and emancipatory tendencies. Gottfried writes:

Only by accepting the utter folly of the project of reconstructing human beings, and by acknowledging the reality of inherent human inequalities, can conservatives have anything to contribute to the political discussion. Otherwise they are merely confirming the errors of the other side, while claiming to represent an alternative.

John Derbyshire also writes for the blog Secular Right.

Theodore Dalrymple on the culture of inflation

In the Summer 2009 issue of City Journal Theodore Dalrymple  discusses the cultural effects of inflation:

asset inflation—ultimately, the debasement of the currency—as the principal source of wealth corrodes the character of people. It not only undermines the traditional bourgeois virtues but makes them ridiculous and even reverses them. Prudence becomes imprudence, thrift becomes improvidence, sobriety becomes mean-spiritedness, modesty becomes lack of ambition, self-control becomes betrayal of the inner self, patience becomes lack of foresight, steadiness becomes inflexibility: all that was wisdom becomes foolishness.

As a general rule, economists do not feel comfortable with cultural arguments. Often, this is not necessary because cultural arguments can be rephrased in technical language that economists do feel comfortable with. In the case of government-induced  currency debasement, the effects of these policies can be evaluated from an economic point of view by studying how inflation alters the incentives and behavior of economic agents. If Dalrymple is correct, the behavioral micro-effects (or even “pico-effects”) of unpredictable changes in the value of money deserve a lot more attention from economists than has been given so far.

Ironically, the cultural effects of inflation have received little attention from empirically-minded  progressive commentators but are increasingly discussed by conservative-leaning Austrian economists. For example, Jörg Guido Hülsmann writes:

The spiritual dimension of these inflation-induced habits seems to be obvious. Money and financial questions come to play an exaggerated role in the life of man. Inflation makes society materialistic. More and more people strive for money income at the expense of personal happiness. Inflation-induced geographical mobility artificially weakens family bonds and patriotic loyalty. Many of those who tend to be greedy, envious, and niggardly anyway fall prey to sin. Even those who are not so inclined by their natures will be exposed to temptations they would not otherwise have felt. And because the vagaries of the financial markets also provide a ready excuse for an excessively parsimonious use of one’s money, donations for charitable institutions will decline.

Similar observations can be made about Keynesian policies to stimulate “the economy.” With the exception of a handful of libertarian socialists, progressives do not appear to be bothered at all by economic doctrines that treat consumption for consumption’s sake as a remedy for economic ills.