By James E. Miller: Late in his life, Murray Rothbard had a law that stated: “people tend to specialize in what they are worst at.” While the aphorism is definitely true about some specialists, more often than not the reverse is accurate. Artists have terrible opinions on politics. Managers of nonprofit organizations are fiscally irresponsible. Politicians don’t understand the profit incentive. Academics haven’t a clue about pricing or marketing.
American comedian Chris Rock is another violator Rothbard’s law. His flair for offensive but incisive comedy is well known. But his knowledge in other fields is lacking, and in some cases utterly misinformed. In a recent interview with Frank Rich of New York Magazine, the stand-up joke spitter has it all wrong when it comes to economics. No surprise there; the entertainment industry, despite raking in billions every year, is the brain trust of economic ignorance.
Mr. Rock’s main target of animus are those just like him: rich, well-off individuals. He tells Rich, “If poor people knew how rich rich people are, there would be riots in the streets.” Evidence for this assertion? Rock cites the “Virginia Airlines first-class lounge,” which offers expert mixologists (fancy for “bartender”) and free food. Apparently alcohol and sustenance priced into a plane ticket equate to robber barons pampered in luxury before jetsetting across the globe.
The idea that poor or working-class folks are itching on the sidelines, waiting to riot over what little crumbs are tossed to them from rapacious capitalists is an idea based in fantasy. Rarely does the proletariat secretly wish to overthrow their alleged oppressors.
Instead, the middle and lower class yearn to enter the higher echelons of the income brackets. They are too busy working to bother with the ontology of class conflict and the end of history. The distraction acts as a blessing. Violent revolutions by the underclass often result in terrible things: the guillotine, the Bolsheviks, military coups, and senseless violence.
That Rock thinks his fellow Americans who make under six-figure salaries are brimming with hatred for the rich tells more about his out-of-touchness with the average guy than his closeness. This speaks to the larger issue of his own epistemology and the pompous way in which he undermines the views of voters. When asked why Americans “seem to want a Bush or a Clinton” in the White House, Rock replies that it’s “hard for me to figure out people voting against their own self-interests.”
Talk about fatal conceit. Rock may fancy himself a step above average intelligence and a keen observer of human affairs – which his comedy, at times, seems to corroborate – but his obvious disdain for those who vote conservative is supercillious to the highest degree. How does he know what the best interest is for everyone? How does he understand the motives behind every vote cast?
Chris Rock may be able to crack a joke but he isn’t a mind reader. He suffers from the same kind of vain arrogance so common in Hollywood celebrities. He doesn’t know what’s in the heart of the working guy who goes to the ballot box. The limelight provides attention; not intelligence.
A large part of the interview is focused on Rock’s children, and his difficulty balancing work life with family life. This a noble struggle, and one that many celebrities face. Yet later in the interview, Rock says that it’s “unfair that you can inherit money that you didn’t work for.” He also likens inheritance to racial intolerance passed down through generations – which, to be fair, can result in people being treated unfairly.
The idea that inheritance is some kind of metaphysical evil is thoroughly Marxist. The third plank of the Communist Manifesto is to abolish all rights of inheritance. Of course, if such a dictate were to be implemented, that would spell the end of capital accumulation and rising standards. It would bring about the ruination of Western civilization. While inheritance may seem unfair, it’s a crucial part of elevating time preferences and saving for the future.
Advanced production that breeds material abundance can only be accomplished through deferring consumption. That means putting away money for the future, including the next generation. Capital is the lifeblood of any economy. Without saving and investment, there is no consumption. As Garet Garrett wrote in his magnificent essay “The Revolution Was,” “If you put a ten-dollar bill under the rug instead of spending it, that is capital formation. It represents ten dollars’ worth of something that might have been immediately consumed, but wasn’t.” The millionaires and billionaires who decry passing your life’s work onto your children are damning their offspring to a life of material disadvantage.
In the hedonistic environment of the Hollywood Hills, it makes sense to spend now and ignore the future. It’s doubtful, however, that movie stars and directors actually spend all their income while they are alive. I imagine many of them sock away their savings for their children – including Chris Rock. So really, is there anything more conceited than a self-loathing millionaire?
What Chris Rock lacks in economic knowledge, he makes up for in pointed commentary about the deleterious effects of political correctness among young adults. Rock refuses to play college campuses because of the “special snowflake” mentality that so many students have adopted. He also condemns the practice of shaming comedians for offensive jokes to the point of career ruination. As a social observer, Rock comes off as fairly conservative. That makes it all the more disappointing he tut-tuts the virtue of prudence and self-preservation.
Surprisingly, Rock demonstrates an understanding of the market process and how the drive for profit has the happy consequence of squashing prejudices. Frank Rich calls comedy a “ruthless marketplace,” to which Rock replies, “It makes people hire people that they would never hire otherwise.” That’s certainly true. Markets demand social cooperation. They also allocate resources in an effective manner. If only Mr. Rock would take the lessons of the marketplace and apply it elsewhere. Perhaps then he could make more sense of the dismal science, and purge the leftist notions about income equality and inheritance that fog his judgment. Until then, I guess we can enjoy the laughs.
James E. Miller is editor-in-chief of Mises Canada.
Source
Mr. Rock’s main target of animus are those just like him: rich, well-off individuals. He tells Rich, “If poor people knew how rich rich people are, there would be riots in the streets.” Evidence for this assertion? Rock cites the “Virginia Airlines first-class lounge,” which offers expert mixologists (fancy for “bartender”) and free food. Apparently alcohol and sustenance priced into a plane ticket equate to robber barons pampered in luxury before jetsetting across the globe.
The idea that poor or working-class folks are itching on the sidelines, waiting to riot over what little crumbs are tossed to them from rapacious capitalists is an idea based in fantasy. Rarely does the proletariat secretly wish to overthrow their alleged oppressors.
Instead, the middle and lower class yearn to enter the higher echelons of the income brackets. They are too busy working to bother with the ontology of class conflict and the end of history. The distraction acts as a blessing. Violent revolutions by the underclass often result in terrible things: the guillotine, the Bolsheviks, military coups, and senseless violence.
That Rock thinks his fellow Americans who make under six-figure salaries are brimming with hatred for the rich tells more about his out-of-touchness with the average guy than his closeness. This speaks to the larger issue of his own epistemology and the pompous way in which he undermines the views of voters. When asked why Americans “seem to want a Bush or a Clinton” in the White House, Rock replies that it’s “hard for me to figure out people voting against their own self-interests.”
Talk about fatal conceit. Rock may fancy himself a step above average intelligence and a keen observer of human affairs – which his comedy, at times, seems to corroborate – but his obvious disdain for those who vote conservative is supercillious to the highest degree. How does he know what the best interest is for everyone? How does he understand the motives behind every vote cast?
Chris Rock may be able to crack a joke but he isn’t a mind reader. He suffers from the same kind of vain arrogance so common in Hollywood celebrities. He doesn’t know what’s in the heart of the working guy who goes to the ballot box. The limelight provides attention; not intelligence.
A large part of the interview is focused on Rock’s children, and his difficulty balancing work life with family life. This a noble struggle, and one that many celebrities face. Yet later in the interview, Rock says that it’s “unfair that you can inherit money that you didn’t work for.” He also likens inheritance to racial intolerance passed down through generations – which, to be fair, can result in people being treated unfairly.
The idea that inheritance is some kind of metaphysical evil is thoroughly Marxist. The third plank of the Communist Manifesto is to abolish all rights of inheritance. Of course, if such a dictate were to be implemented, that would spell the end of capital accumulation and rising standards. It would bring about the ruination of Western civilization. While inheritance may seem unfair, it’s a crucial part of elevating time preferences and saving for the future.
Advanced production that breeds material abundance can only be accomplished through deferring consumption. That means putting away money for the future, including the next generation. Capital is the lifeblood of any economy. Without saving and investment, there is no consumption. As Garet Garrett wrote in his magnificent essay “The Revolution Was,” “If you put a ten-dollar bill under the rug instead of spending it, that is capital formation. It represents ten dollars’ worth of something that might have been immediately consumed, but wasn’t.” The millionaires and billionaires who decry passing your life’s work onto your children are damning their offspring to a life of material disadvantage.
In the hedonistic environment of the Hollywood Hills, it makes sense to spend now and ignore the future. It’s doubtful, however, that movie stars and directors actually spend all their income while they are alive. I imagine many of them sock away their savings for their children – including Chris Rock. So really, is there anything more conceited than a self-loathing millionaire?
What Chris Rock lacks in economic knowledge, he makes up for in pointed commentary about the deleterious effects of political correctness among young adults. Rock refuses to play college campuses because of the “special snowflake” mentality that so many students have adopted. He also condemns the practice of shaming comedians for offensive jokes to the point of career ruination. As a social observer, Rock comes off as fairly conservative. That makes it all the more disappointing he tut-tuts the virtue of prudence and self-preservation.
Surprisingly, Rock demonstrates an understanding of the market process and how the drive for profit has the happy consequence of squashing prejudices. Frank Rich calls comedy a “ruthless marketplace,” to which Rock replies, “It makes people hire people that they would never hire otherwise.” That’s certainly true. Markets demand social cooperation. They also allocate resources in an effective manner. If only Mr. Rock would take the lessons of the marketplace and apply it elsewhere. Perhaps then he could make more sense of the dismal science, and purge the leftist notions about income equality and inheritance that fog his judgment. Until then, I guess we can enjoy the laughs.
James E. Miller is editor-in-chief of Mises Canada.
Source
No comments:
Post a Comment