Noam Chomsky often mentions how the works of Adam Smith and the works of Classical Liberalism in general are almost always misinterpreted. He says that Adam Smith's use of "invisible hand" in Wealth of Nations is actually an argument AGAINST what we would now call neoliberalism. He also says that modern libertarianism is "radically opposed" to Classical Liberalism, and that Adam Smith was in favor of regulation as long as it benefited the "working man." This is interesting because it seems the left and right both agree that Classical Liberalism is synonymous with Capitalism. Do you agree? Are the works of Classical Liberalism and Adam Smith grossly misinterpreted? Here is the reference for my title: https://youtu.be/8mxp_wgFWQo?t=1m30s Here he is talking about the "invisible hand": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaZORYaygo0
Is modern U.S. libertarianism is "radically opposed" to Classical Liberalism?
Do you like this suggestion?
Showing 1 reaction
Sign in with