The Corner

Gingrich, Krugman, Asimov, Popper

Mark: Here’s the relevant bit from the loving New Yorker profile of that once-obscure economist who shares Gingrich’s inspiration, and apparently his belief that civilization can be managed at the largest scales by all-seeing technocrats:

Krugman explained that he’d become an economist because of science fiction. When he was a boy, he’d read Isaac Asimov’s “Foundation” trilogy and become obsessed with the central character, Hari Seldon. Seldon was a “psychohistorian”—a scientist with such a precise understanding of the mechanics of society that he could predict the course of events thousands of years into the future and save mankind from centuries of barbarism. He couldn’t predict individual behavior—that was too hard—but it didn’t matter, because history was determined not by individuals but by laws and hidden forces. “If you read other genres of fiction, you can learn about the way people are and the way society is,” Krugman said to the audience, “but you don’t get very much thinking about why are things the way they are, or what might make them different. What would happen if ?”

Whole thing here. I won’t go so far as to say that believing the course of human events is shaped in knowable, predictable ways by “laws” and “hidden forces” is unconservative, but it ain’t un-unconservative. I wonder if Krugman or Gingrich ever read Karl Popper’s The Poverty of Historicism?

UPDATE: I didn’t think this needed explaining, but the kind of predictions I have in mind aren’t actuarial (how many people will die of heart attacks next year given factors x, y, z,. . ., n) or even statistical. There are, of course, probabilistic laws. I’m talking about predictions of a grander and more specific character. As a for instance, the prediction by the apparently well-respected Russian “academic” Igor Panarin that the United States would descend into civil war and split into six parts by June, 2010.

Daniel Foster — Daniel Foster has been news editor of National Review Online since 2009, and was a web site editor until 2012. His work has appeared in The American Spectator, The American ...

Most Popular


The Gun-Control Debate Could Break America

Last night, the nation witnessed what looked a lot like an extended version of the famous “two minutes hate” from George Orwell’s novel 1984. During a CNN town hall on gun control, a furious crowd of Americans jeered at two conservatives, Marco Rubio and Dana Loesch, who stood in defense of the Second ... Read More
Film & TV

Why We Can’t Have Wakanda

SPOILERS AHEAD Black Panther is a really good movie that lives up to the hype in just about every way. Surely someone at Marvel Studios had an early doubt, reading the script and thinking: “Wait, we’re going to have hundreds of African warriors in brightly colored tribal garb, using ancient weapons, ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Obstruction Confusions

In his Lawfare critique of one of my several columns about the purported obstruction case against President Trump, Gabriel Schoenfeld loses me — as I suspect he will lose others — when he says of himself, “I do not think I am Trump-deranged.” Gabe graciously expresses fondness for me, and the feeling is ... Read More
Science & Tech

Set NASA Free

The Trump administration has proposed shifting the International Space Station from a NASA-exclusive research facility to a semi-public, semi-private one. Its plan would nix all government funding for the ISS by 2025 and award at least $150 million per year to NASA to help with the transition. This would be a ... Read More