Adam Smith vs Arthur C Clarke

Think of it as literary wrestling or the class struggle of ideas and fictional idealism.

Smith famously wrote Wealth of Nations (the actual title is longer as was the norm in the mid 1700's) and this book laid the groundwork in political economics and is our foundation of modern economics arguably. Concepts such as the invisible hand, self interested competition and early ideas around opportunity costs were all introduced by this gentleman who had brilliant insights.

So how does an 18th century political economist and general thinker end up at odds with a 20th century science fiction writer ?

Arthur C Clarke is amongst the most talented, and creative minds of the last century (He's died two years ago, living in Sri Lanka), and gave the world tangible science - he contributed to the development of radar systems in WWII and later is credited with the core ideas behind satellite technology, geostationary orbits and space flight. But it's the creative side that has made his name more well known. Famously the creator behind such works as 2001: Space Odyssey and other foundational elements of science fiction writing, Clarke imagined worlds and superimposed the human condition upon them in a way many could relate to.

One of his books was required reading for me in school - a piece of fiction known as Childhood's End brought into the curriculum by a teacher who understood the need to make literature and reading enjoyable. In this book, a world is imagined where humanity evolves through a helping hand (not Smith's invisible hand) and it proposes a world where production is handled automatically and offered freely by the state. People have no need to work to survive, rather work is done out of the joy of doing so, or to gain extra material possessions. There's a particular line or two that has stuck with for over 30 years, and it goes like this - "....was considerably less of a burden than the providing for the armies of ticket collectors, shop assistants, bank clerks, stock brokers and so forth, whose main function, when one took the global point of view, was to transfer items from one ledger to another." I love that small piece of writing as it sums up our entire political economic system and dismisses it elegantly and simply. Witnessing these two great thinkers and being present as they might have discussed ideal "systems" would be a wondrous thing. It may have even gotten physical.