It is my realisation that, through reading “The Theory of Moral Sentiments,” in addition to “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations” through synthesis, that Adam Smith was a Socialist.
What do I mean by Socialist? Not the American assumption of command economy. It may conform to the generally accepted definition of a system where the means of production is owned by the people. In a way, through Moral Sentiments one can see that in a society in such a perfect equilibrium the tendency will be towards a scenario where the means of production is owned by the entirety of society.
Albeit, what I mean by Socialist is the belief that the needs of society as a whole takes precedence over the needs of any particular individual. What Smith argued was that in a society that is moral, where ethical checks and balances are in place, the needs of society can be fulfilled through the individual’s pursuit of self-interest. The premises of Smith’s argument is the existence of an egalitarian society with moral checks and balances.
For many outside of Africa, and some in Africa, it is strange that Africa is predisposed to socialism in the Marxian perspective. To me this makes perfect sense for various factors, but paramount among them is the affects of colonialism.
Societies were turned into extractive vassals in the service of imperial servitude. Through colonialism the pre-existing society with its moral and ethical sentiments were disrupted to near annihilation. The end of colonial rule did not decolonise the continent. The same patterns of extraction exist and they keepo existing because there has been no mending of the moral checks and balances. How can there be ethical equilibrium, when the west has not mended or changed its unethical behaviour?
If the west wants to see an Africa that embraces Smith above Marx, it will need to make reparations and end its extractive view of Africa.
