R. R. Reno’s extensive work, The Return of the Strong Gods, attempts to tackle numerous topics, with economics being a significant but underwhelming component. Reno touches on economic inequality but wisely remarks, “This is the sort of assertion I prefer to leave to the economic theorists to debate.” Despite this sensibility, many of his views appear perplexing, such as his assertion that economists argue for deregulating animal spirits, when historically, those spirits have justified regulation instead, as posited by John Maynard Keynes in his General Theory.
Moreover, Reno’s confidence in suggesting that Apple should manufacture products in America ignores complexities of global supply chains, oversimplifying the economic landscape. He states, “The problem is not the ‘vast scale’ [of international supply chains]…” demonstrating a disconnect with the realities of modern economics that seasoned economists would instantly recognise as flawed.
He critiques open-society philosophy by positing a preference for “advantageous trade” over “open trade,” neglecting the economic consensus that open trade is, in fact, often advantageous. This dismissal hints at a fundamental misunderstanding of trade ties without elaborating on opposing economic arguments, revealing an unconstructive stance that lacks engagement with significant economic discourse.
Reno’s treatment of F. A. Hayek is particularly troubling, as he misattributes views to Hayek that suggest the weakening of social norms. In truth, Hayek championed the importance of these norms, encapsulating the idea that individual liberty flourishes within a framework supported by tradition and morality. Reno’s inaccuracies can be likened to confusing a butterfly for a boulder when dissecting Hayek’s nuanced philosophy.
His misunderstandings reflect a broader issue where Reno seems to project his own interpretations onto Hayek’s extensive contributions, while also recognising but inadequately addressing contradictions in his interpretation. Phrases Reno critiques are often veiled in layered complexities that warrant deeper understanding rather than mere dismissal.
Additionally, Reno tends to mischaracterise Milton Friedman’s ideas, prompting caution. His inaccuracies raise red flags, leading readers to question his interpretations of other thinkers, such as Albert Camus, where his validity becomes suspect based on earlier mistakes.
In a thoughtful reflection, the book reminds one of Bilbo Baggins’s sentiments of feeling “thin, sort of stretched, like butter scraped over too much bread,” indicating that Reno may have overreached in weaving together diverse intellectual discourses. Despite its shortfalls, his book prompted valuable contemplation, prompting both engagement and potential for continued discourse, reaffirming that even if a work is flawed, it can indeed be worthwhile to explore and challenge.
R. R. Reno’s *The Return of the Strong Gods* discusses various themes, including economics, but struggles with accuracy and engagement with economic thinkers. His critiques of concepts like open trade and analyses of figures such as Hayek and Friedman are often flawed or oversimplified, raising skepticism regarding his broader arguments. Despite its shortcomings, the book prompts valuable reflection and dialogue.
Reno’s work, while broad and ambitious, falters in its economic interpretations and misrepresents critical thinkers like Hayek and Friedman. His tendency to assert flawed arguments without engaging meaningfully with existing economic theories detracts from the depth of his analysis. Nevertheless, the book still serves as a springboard for contemplation and further dialogue, emphasising the notion that value can arise from even the most flawed theories as they provoke thought and challenge perspectives.
Original Source: www.econlib.org
