WENDELL ROBINSON . COM

I’m not an economist (my father is about as close as I get, and he’s still a few steps shy of his doctorate) nor is P.J. O’Rourke, and that’s why I found O’Rourke’s most recent book On the Wealth of Nations (from the Atlantic Monthly’s “Books that Changed the World” series) so entertaining. The book is O’Rourke’s take on Adam Smith’s basis for modern economics - the lengthy 18th century treatise The Wealth Of Nations.

Oh how I wish this book was available when I struggled (unsuccessfully) as a college freshman through Econ101 (where the only thing funnier than this book was our instructor’s admonishment as he passed out the course syllabus, “I teach you E-CO-nahm-IX and you teach me English, ha, ha, ha!”). I failed - at both. But at least if this book was around I might have found my difficulty with the subject more enjoyable.

What about the book? Oh yeah…

I must warn those unfamiliar with O’Rourke (as I must ashamedly admit I was prior to reading this book) that On the Wealth of Nations is not meant to provide an intellectually critical critique of Smith’s book, rather it serves as a wonderful way to humorously get at what Smith was trying to say.

On the Wealth of Nations is written in what I’ve learned is P.J. O’Rourke’s style of causticly dry wit (I learned this because after I read On the Wealth of Nations, I found his sense of humor brilliant and went out and bought everything I could find that he’s written). Borne out of the gonzo-journalism age of the early Rolling Stone magazine and Hunter S. Thompson, O’Rourke’s writing betrays the author as an unmitigated smart-ass (a description which I think O’Rourke would appreciate). He’s at his best poking fun at life’s realities, and his approach to Wealth does justice to both Smith and society in general.

O’Rourke’s book is laid out in a chronological approach to mirror Smith’s Wealth. Following Smith’s litany of Wealth’s books (there were five) and mixing in commentary on Smith’s 1759 volume The Theory of Moral Sentiments (which O’Rourke uses to support and complicate many of Smith’s positions), the author gives the reader an idea of how Smith’s theories relate to the foundation of modern economics. Not surprisingly, O’Rourke also dwells heavily on how Smith’s book helped to steer the ship of state that brought us (U.S.) to where we are in our relationship to our British forebearers. Given the timing of Wealth’s original publication date, 1776, it’s not hard to fathom that the book had some impact on the economic relationship between our colonies and mother England.

O’Rourke’s On Wealth of Nations is not a lengthy book (268 pages) and covers as much about Smith the man (including his life-long friendship with David Hume and encounters with the likes of Voltaire and Benjamin Franklin) as it does with relating Wealth’s foundation for modern economics. It’s worthy of reading for anybody who likes P.J. O’Rourke, or enjoys an interest in economics (just don’t take it too seriously).

P.J. O’Rourke’s On the Wealth of Nations published by Atlantic Monthly Press is available from fine booksellers everywhere and online here. For more information on P.J. O’Rourke, you can visit his website (that he publicly claims no involvement with) here. For another perspective on On The Wealth of Nations you can read Brad Warbiany’s The Liberty Papers review here.