Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site whuxl.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!orb From: orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) Newsgroups: net.politics.theory Subject: The Myth of Robinson Crusoe Message-ID: <663@whuxl.UUCP> Date: Mon, 24-Jun-85 11:19:40 EDT Article-I.D.: whuxl.663 Posted: Mon Jun 24 11:19:40 1985 Date-Received: Tue, 25-Jun-85 07:57:38 EDT References: <298@spar.UUCP> <2380037@acf4.UUCP> <657@whuxl.UUCP> <2325@topaz.ARPA> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Whippany Lines: 46 Devout followers of Libertarianism and even orthodox neo-classical economists are very fond of the Robinson Crusoe myth. In fact, one of my economics textbooks made the Robinson Crusoe myth part of its argument. The Robinson Crusoe myth is the myth that economic activity and likewise all important social activity, (since we all "know" that economics is *the* most important social activity) is totally individualistic in nature. Imagine Robinson Crusoe on his island, we are told, trying to produce the necessities and luxuries of life. From that we can then glean a model for all of society. My economics professor was stunned when I pointed out the obvious which he and his fellow economists had totally ignored: namely that in fact, Mr. Robinson Crusoe was hardly a model of any society at all except one doomed to failure. For he had no children. Without passing on its fruits to its children society would soon die out. But this consideration is not part of the "economic" sphere and hence totally unimportant. Trivial. Other Libertarians have gone on great harangues about Mr. X and his widget maker. Mr. X is simply the relative to Robinson Crusoe on his island. Libertarians and their kindred economists will go on at great lengths about the individual's right to create as many widgets as s/he wants in their own home. Nobody wishes to deny Mr. X or Robinson the right to be totally self-sufficient if they wish. Not even Communist societies prevent individuals from producing all the widgets they want in their own homes. But this is not what Libertarians and neo-classical economists are really talking about. What they are talking about is the *social* claim for Mr. X, widget-maker, to be able to claim as much of other people's production as he can possibly extract out of Mr. X's production of widgets. Without being able to claim *other people's production* Mr. X's production of even a million widgets is completely useless. "Let him eat widgets"!!" said his fellows. This is not a case of totally individualistic production- in fact as we all know there is no such thing for even Mr. X must rely on the work, intellectual or otherwise, of others to even get the parts for his widgets, for the machines to make them,etc. The myth of Robinson Crusoe, of freedom to produce solely for oneself and one's own use is just that, a myth. What Libertarians are really talking about is unrestrained claims on *others* social production. tim sevener whuxl!orb