The art of war, however, as it is certainly the noblest of all arts, so in the progress of improvement it necessarily becomes one of the most complicated among them. Bk. V, Ch. 1, Pt. 1. (pg. 753 in Cannan edition)
The first duty of the sovereign, therefore, that of defending the society from the violence and injustice of other independent societies, grows gradually more and more expensive, as the society advances in civilization. Bk. V, Ch. 1, Pt. 1. (pg. 764)
These two passages reminded me a lot of Rousseau, but they invoked different feelings than last week's readings did. As some of you may remember, I understood Rousseau to be giving a sort of "that was then, this is now" message. I was frustrated that his discourse makes readers ponder and potentially long for the "then" when it is impossible to revert back to the state of savage man. In today's readings, Smith points to yet another fall that accompanies progress. As society becomes more civilized, people become less warlike and thus defense of society is more costly. Enhancements in artillery and the need for more extensive training of warriors are expensive and time-consuming. By introducing the fiscal consequence of such advancements, Smith makes me wonder whether societal progress is worth it? Now I'm just flat out discouraged. Don't get me wrong, I love being a civilized human. But there is something about a more primitive state that is appealing. How do we confront reality while longing for the ideal?
No comments:
Post a Comment