whisper
Adam Smith 1776
Is a translation of Adam Smith in the 21st century a must-have read? Well, many have tried to interpret Smith during the victorian era (pre-statistical economics having been developed) and all that I have come across have failed. I don’t think that name-dropping Adam Smith will particularly perk peoples’ attention, as the father of industrial revolution has been forgotten and few people know his name, let alone what his messages actually were.
Throughout my life, ever since I learnt the old dialect and grammar in my early 20s, I have experienced a correlative phenomenon whereby people born after the year 1960 misunderstand this grammar and think i have gone senile. It is to be supposed that a publisher would not be enamoured with a now extinct dialect. I don’t believe that any university press would be willing to stake their reputation upon what is in essence a political manifesto or ideology. Then they are likely to find problems in my grammar and want it rewritten for a modern audience. But for me, the biggest no-no to publishing through an existing publisher would be my loss of control over my own project, and especially in particular the loss of my own future income from my own sales of the books.
Regarding whether my work is niche, I believe that it is not niche. I suspect that some believe this because my prowess in the field of mathematics is actually quite poor (my opinion) and have juxtaposed this with the assumption that I must also be equally poor in the field of PPE (politics, philosophy,and economics). But I maintain that I have enough maths to excel in PPE, and that leadership is about guiding the masses, not manipulating the mob to achieve short term aims (as Donald Trump does). Everybody understands the same thing slightly differently. The point of my book is that it is politics. Most people have not read in depth about what they are voting for. Politics affords no second chances if I say something erroneously. I posit that because of the cryptic way in which Adam Smith wrote (and also because of changes within language), 21st century economists know scantily little about what Smith truly said, else they wouldn’t do things which contradict each other and Smith’s doctrines. Actions have consequences, but what? (quantum wave collapse and spooky action at a distance). We are all bound by laws of our physical realm (stuck in a prison). The absence of the answer (politically or theologically) leads people to become all hot and bothered, which seems ubiquitous in today’s society. Just some thoughts for you to peruse….. The phrase “who will guard the guards” is very apropos.
Rivers of Imprisonment
This work is supposed to be a syllabus to educate the layperson. I have talked about various matters which the reader (presumably) does not already know. The purpose of this is to establish myself as some kind of an expert about the same, and to dissuade the reader from boredom. TLDR is the modern acronym for too long, didn’t read. I do like maths but it has been something I have done when I have had nothing else to do. I have sacrificed my study of it because I genuinely think that Western civilisation requires saving. As Gandi said: Western civilization would be a good idea. Although I have a yearning for maths, I just don’t believe that I have a penchant for it. I am much better at discerning truth within matters of human interactions – or so I think.
I consider that my purpose in the grand scheme of things (from the Almighty, or whatever) is to help and assist, and that doesn’t always involve doing what I want, but what I must. So I think I have focussed my energies, time, and efforts by Adam Smith wisely. I re-began this course of study around about the end of 2021. The going has been fair. I say re-began because it was something I failed at in the year 2000 when I was 23 years old. I required a more rigorous background of general studies at that time.
I say the underlying understanding of the “price of money” behaves contrary to the “price of apples” in modern syntax, and this observation of psychology, not reality, belongs to a primary school syllabus – but it it missing from it! For everybody. Also Smith points out that GDP cannot be measured in money, as circulating stock comprises finished goods, provisions, materials, and money, from which money must be deducted in order to consider what revenue is. The stock reserved immediate consumption must be paid for from the profits which are part of this revenue: in finished goods, provisions, and materials. Not money! Else people will consume their capital stock, becoming poor and causing a decline in the wealth: where wealth may be measured in the amount of material tangible stuff which becomes consumed.
Modern economic theories sound presently like an episode of Herge’s Adventures of Tintin. I used to read the Adventures of Tintin books when I was a child, and it always occurred to me that the protagonist would buy a ticket to the Orient after discovering an address written inside a matchbox from a swanky hotel which indicated that Mr Rastapopulous was involved with an Indian fakir who had some chloroform. Donald Trump won two entire presidential elections merely by pointing out something similar. I feel that there was not any political discussion of ideas coming from anybody except Trump. The only alternative was to put faith in modern economic theory, which I say is fundamentally flawed. I do not believe that Donald Trump has the answer, and by vastly accelerating the application of tariffs upon foreign imports, the accelaration of poverty within the United States will become soon felt: though I don’t know if this will be felt as attributable to the consequences of his policies. I stand for neither the political left nor the political right; but if I live long enough, and have the opportunity, I am pointing out home truths in political economy (or so I say), and will propose something new. I would not change the democratic political machinery though, because doing so would be far too dangerous and might lead to political coups d’etat, anarchy, a break down of law and order, the lack of punishment of crime, and the inability to change the government or even implement a government at all, like we see in Haiti today.
Now, Newton, Gallileo, or Stephen Hawkings, by proposing new fields – as I am doing – were not performing tasks without the tools for the job. One man mowing a meadow can be achieved with modern machinery, but the adage presumes he only has a scythe. My work is not applied nor pure maths, but examines the principles upon which mathematical models can be subsequently based. If those principles are in error (such as the regulation of markets being called “free markets”) then all bets are off in terms of understanding the current prevaricating status quo.
As an aside I wrote this limmerick about Donald Trump.
Donald trumped. did a fart.
now we see in holy art,
how farts are blessed, like a lamb.
With Trump the global door shall jamb.
The people starve with lots of guns,
hunting food should be such fun!
Let’s not shoot folk, this anarchy,
loses greatness, as you see:
that to be great, this poverty,
shall not be it, not liberty.
His political rags to riches story would make a very good sci-fi one. It is almost as though his rise to power has being deigned by some higher power. The following ditty is a satire.
Hey big ben, for the little green men.
I knew one too, his name was Glen.
Little green men come in from Mars.
They have flown right round the stars.
They landed in a central place.
Saw big ben and smiled apace.
Went to see the holy shrine,
of the pope, dear, and divine.
They missed their home and went back there,
let’s thank God for our au pair.
I also asked AI to generate the following image of Donald Trump grinning from Trump Tower.
