(written by Terry MacNeil, on November 18-20, 23, 2024)

The last I heard from a former friend of mine, he said I was a “quasi-intellectual” – and to be clear, that was supposed to be an insult. At the time I thought (and I still do) that since I’ll never qualify as being an “intellectual” – I’m actually OK being branded a “quasi-intellectual”. The reasons? One reason, is that I don’t have the brainpower (nor the work ethic) to complete a PhD. Another, is that I will never be able to come up with anything “new” or “groundbreaking” in fields such as economics, history, sociology, philosophy, etc. Every original thought I’ve ever had – has basically been made by someone else, before me. Although, I LIKE to THINK that the hilarious political fiction I write – is sufficiently “different” from what has come before it, and sets me apart from the vast majority of today’s fiction writers.

And today I finished reading the economist Adam Smith’s book The Wealth of Nations (unabridged). Well, “economist” was a title Mr. Smith only applied to certain French intellectuals – not himself. So he had something in common with Karl Marx – as far as labels went, both men only viewed themselves as “philosophers”, NOT “economists”. But I digress. The Marxist economist Michael Hudson (an ACTUAL intellectual) emphasizes that if you want to properly understand economics – it is essential to read lots of Marxist economic analysis, but it is ALSO essential to read lots of non-Marxist economic analysis. That’s the main reason I forced myself to read The Wealth of Nations – and next intended on reading the economic works of guys Mr. Hudson recommended, other major “classical political economy” dudes like Mill, Ricardo, etc. Well, I suffered so much reading The Theory of Moral Sentiments and then The Wealth of Nations during the past year – that I took frequent breaks while reading those books, to read other books that were way less excruciating, and WAY MORE enjoyable. After I finished reading the entire The Wealth of Nations, I knew there was NO WAY I was going to force myself to read David Ricardo’s On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, Thomas Malthus’ similarly titled Principles of Political Economy, and John Stuart Mill’s EXACTLY titled Principles of Political Economy. To do so – would not only drive me insane, there is no fucking way I’d be able to keep track of what each individual economist was saying (their areas of common agreement, and their areas of disagreement). Instead, I’ll take the intellectually lazy way out – by reading the economic books of Mr. Hudson and Ernesto Screpanti (and reading what THEY SAY guys like Ricardo, Malthus, and Mill said). I’m not an intellectual – and while I consider myself “quite smart”, I can’t possibly follow Mr. Hudson’s advice for studying economics. My IQ is not nearly high enough, and my work ethic not nearly strong enough.

And every so often, my Mom asks me if I’d ever go back to school. I always say no, because I wouldn’t want to deal with the ensuing mountain of student debt. But since I screwed up my grades so badly in my fourth year of university (and was kicked out of the Honours Program), a part of my wounded ego DOES want to start a new university undergraduate degree in economics or political science. The main reason for THAT, being that I wouldn’t be nearly as overwhelmed by the course content that I had been when I was young, dumb, drunk, ignorant, psychotic, and depressed (here referring to the years of my early twenties). Today, I’m confident I could pull off a Master’s degree in political science, and possibly in economics (though I would ONLY study economics in an institution like The New School in the USA). Oh well. I can always dream. Ⓐ