Richard III, by William Shakespeare

Every Christmas my cousin Mark and I agree to read a classic by the next Christmas. This year Richard III was was we decided to go for.

Richard III is a story of an ambitious duke who was willing to kill for the throne. I found Richard to be a "fun" evil character because he's witty, plotting, and malicious. The general plot is that Richard had Henry VI killed, and then Richard's brother Edward became king. As soon as Edward died, Richard killed the other claimants to the throne and seized it himself.

First he had to kill his brother Clarence. He mused to himself after meeting up with Clarence.

Go, tread the path that thou shalt ne'er return:
Simple, plain Clarence, I do love thee so,
That I will shortly send thy soul to heaven.

In a bizarre but funny scene, Richard met up with Anne, who was accompanying her father's corpse to his funeral. Richard had killed both her father (Henry VI) and her brother, but now he tried to woo Anne because she would legitimize his rule if he can get the throne.

Anne: Foul devil, for God's sake, hence, and trouble us not,
For thou hast made the happy earth thy hell,
Filled it with cursing cries and deep exclaims.
If thou delight to view thy heinous deeds,
Behold this pattern of thy butcheries.

After about a page of Anne's curses, Richard responded, "Lady, you know no rules of charity, which renders good for bad, blessings for curses." I thought that was pretty funny.

Richard attempted to woo Anne.

Anne: And thou unfit for any place but hell.
Richard: Yes, one place else, if you will hear me name it.
Anne: Some dungeon.
Richard: Your bed-chamber.
Anne: Ill rest betide the chamber where thou liest!
Richard: So will it, madam, till I lie with you.
Anne: I hope so.

Queen Margaret, Henry VI's wife, cursed all the new royals as well as Richard.

Richard: Have done thy charm, thou hateful withered hag!
Queen Margaret: And leave out thee? stay, dog, for thou shalt hear me.
If heaven have any grievous plague in store
Exceeding those that I can wish upon thee,
O, let them keep it till thy sins be ripe,
And then hurl down their indignation
On thee, the troubler of the poor world's peace!

Queen Elizabeth mourned her husband Edward's death, one of the few deaths in the play not caused by Richard.

Why grow the branches when the root is gone?
Why wither not the leaves that want their sap?
If you will live, lament; if die, be brief.

The citizens were afraid of what would happen after Edward died.

Citizen 1: Come, come, we fear the worst; all will be will.
Citizen 3: When clouds are seen, wise men put on their cloaks;
When great leaves fall, then winter is at hand;
When the sun sets, who doth not look for night?
Untimely storms makes men expect a dearth.
All may be well; but, if God sort it so,
'Tis more than we deserve, or I expect.

King Richard had guilty dreams the night before the battle that would kill him. But in the morning he was ready to put aside his guilt and fight for his ambition again.

Let not our babbling dreams affright our souls:
Conscience is but a word that cowards use,
Devised at first to keep the strong in awe:
Our strong arms be our conscience, swords our law.
March on, join bravely, let us to it pell-mell;
If not to heaven, then hand in hand to hell.

The Wealth of Nations (the rest of the book), by Adam Smith

It took me over 6 months, but I finally finished!

He pointed out the follies of the "mercantile system", which was the name he gave to protectionism, and of the politicians who voted for those policies.

That it was the spirit of monopoly which originally both invented and propagated this doctrine, cannot be doubted; and they who first taught it were by no means such fool as they who believed it.

In the middle ages the laws enforced buying produce locally, directly from farmers. However, it was not very good for their overall economy and it even increased the price of food. In the middle ages, anyone who bought corn from a farmer and then resold it at a higher price could be imprisoned and set in the pillory! However, since farmers could only sell to their immediate neighbors their market was extremely limited. That meant there was no great incentive for them to improve their lands and therefore their harvest were smaller than they could have been.

He talked about the motives of colonization.

... the council of Castile determined to take possession of countries of which the inhabitants were plainly incapable of defending themselves. The pious purpose of converting them to Christianity sanctified the injustice of the project. But the hope of finding treasures of gold there, was the sole motive which prompted to undertake it.

Gold mining projects were a conquistador favorite but they were pretty much a waste of effort.

But though the judgment of sober reason and experience concerning such projects [mines] h as always been extremely unfavourable, that of human avidity has commonly been quite otherwise. The same passion which has suggested to so many people the absurd idea of the philosopher's stone, has suggested to others the equally absurd one of immense rich mines of gold and silver. They did not consider that the value of those metals has, in all ages and nations, arisen chiefly from their scarcity.

The 18th century version of "easy come easy go"

Light come light go, says the proverb; and the ordinary tone of expence seems every where to be regulated, not so much according to the real ability of spending as to the supposed facility of getting money to spend.

He published the book in 1776 and he has some interesting comments on the situation with the American colonies.

They are very weak who flatter themselves that, in the state to which things have come, our colonies will be easily conquered by force alone. The persons who now govern the resolutions of what they call their continental congress, feel in themselves at this moment a degree of importance which, perhaps the greatest subjects in Europe scarce feel. From shopkeepers, tradesmen, and attornies, they are become statesmen and legislators, and are employed in contriving a new form of government for an extensive empire, which, they flatter themselves, will become, and which, indeed, seems very likely to become, one of the greatest and most formidable that ever was in the world.

He proposed that the colonies have full representation in Parliament and be a co-equal part of Great Britain. He even predicted that the capital of Great Britain would move from London to America! There's a fun "alternate history" novel in this idea somewhere.

He talked more about how mercantile legislation oppresses poor people in favor of the rich.

It is the industry which is carried on for the benefit of the rich and powerful, that is principally encouraged by our mercantile system. That which is carried on fro the benefit of the poor and indigent, is too often, either neglected, or oppressed.

The mercantile system's laws flip capitalism upside down. Demand is more important than supply because supply will always follow demand. Laws that attempt to subvert that are counterproductive. Hmm, is there a demand for GM's cars anymore?

Consumption is the sole end and purpose of all production; and the interest of the producer ought to be attended to, only so far as it may be necessary for promoting that of the consumer. The maxim is so perfectly self-evident, that it would bbe absurd to attempt to prove it. But in the mercantile system, the interest of the consumer is almost constantly sacrificed to that of the producer; and it seems to consider production, and not consumption, as the ultimate end and object of all industry and commerce.

Rich people owe a lot to the government and should be more than willing to support it.

It is only under the shelter of the civil magistrate that the owner of that valuable property, which is acquired by the labour of many years, or perhaps of many successive generations, can sleep a single night in security. He is at all times surrounded by unknown enemies, whom, though he can never appease, and from whose injustice he can be protected only by the powerful arm of the civil magistrate continually held up to chastise it.

In 18th century attornies were paid by the page!

In order to increase their payment, the attornies and clerks have contrived to multiply words beyond all necessity, to the corruption of the law language of, I believe, every court of justice in Europe.

As a college professor himself, Adam Smith had harsh words for the educational system. Even back then, teachers had no incentive to teach well!

The discipline of colleges and universities is in general contrived, not for the benefit of the students, but for the interest, or more properly speaking, for the ease of the masters. Its object is, in all cases, to maintain the authority of the master, and whether he neglects of performs his duty, to oblige the students in all cases to behave to him as if he performed it with the greatest diligence and ability.

He criticized the amount of time universities spent on metaphysics as opposed to the natural sciences.

The proper subject of experiment and observation, a subject in which a careful attention is capable of making so many useful discoveries, was almost entirely neglected. The subject in which, after a few very simple and almost obvious truths, the most careful attention can discover nothing but obscurity and uncertainty, and can consequently produce nothing but subtleties and sophisms, was greatly cultivated.

He was in favor of progressive taxation.

The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expence of hte rich; and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. A tax upon house-rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this sort of inequality there would not, perhaps, be any thing very unreasonable. It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expence, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.

The Federalist Papers, by Hamilton, Madison, and Jay

The Federalist Papers were written by Alexander Hamilton and James Madison (primarily) with a couple contributions from John Jay. They wrote them for the opinion section of a New York newspaper to convince New Yorkers to ratify the Constitution. It's amazing how well thought-out each paper is when you consider that they only had 3-4 days to write each one. On the other hand, they had been at the Constitutional Convention arguing about it for a whole summer, so most of their arguments had already been worked out.

It really gave me a sense for how precarious the country was under the Articles of Confederation. The national government was so ineffective that if the Constitution had not been ratified, there was serious talk of splitting the country into 2-3 smaller regional confederations. Hamilton warned (correctly in my opinion) that these regional confederations would inevitably war with each other, provoked most likely by European powers.

This is an excellent book to read if you want to know why our government is structured the way it is. I came away respecting Hamilton, Madison, and Jay for their theoretical knowledge and the practical solutions they came up with.

Madison wanted a separation of powers and checks and balances in order to protect against tyranny. I like how he talked about "parchment barriers."

After discriminating, therefore, in theory, the several classes of power, as they may in their nature be legislative, executive, or judiciary, the next and most difficult task is to provide some practical security for each, against the invasion of the others. What this security ought to be is the great problem to be solved. Will it be sufficient to mark, with precision, the boundaries of those departments in the constitution of the government, and to trust to those parchment barriers against the encroaching spirit of power?

In a later paper, Madison developed the idea that each branch will compete for power, and that this structure will keep any one branch from dominating. In this age of vast presidential power, it's interesting that the most dangerous branch in their opinion was the legislative branch, since it was most directly connected to the people and their mandate.

Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place. It may be a reflection on human nature that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxilliary precautions.

Hamilton wanted a powerful executive. In the Articles of Confederation there wasn't a national executive or judicial branch, so this seemed risky at the time. The executive branch felt like... well, like King George.

A feeble executive implies a feeble execution of the government. A feeble execution is but another phrase for a bad execution; and a government ill executed, whatever it may be in theory, must be, in practice, a bad government.

Hamilton was concerned the legislative branch would use its power over the Treasury to coerce the other branches. There are specific rules in the Constitution about how often the President and Supreme Court justices can have their salaries changed.

In the general course of human nature, a power over a man's subsistence amounts to a power over his will.

Hamilton's conclusion:

A NATION without a NATIONAL GOVERNMENT is, in my view, an awful spectacle. The establishment of a Constitution, in time of profound peace, by the voluntary consent of a whole people, is a PRODIGY, to the completion of which I look forward with trembling anxiety.

Macbeth, by William Shakespeare

On the theory I know more of life now to appreciate them, I've decided to revisit all the Shakespeare plays I haven't read since high school.

I started with Macbeth for no particular reason.

One of Macbeth's enemies sees that Macbeth's grip on power is fairly weak.

Now does he feel
his secret murders sticking on his hands;
Now minutely revolts upbraid his faith-breach;
Those he commands move only in command,
Nothing in love; now does he feel his title
Hang loose about him, like a giant's robe
Upon a dwarfish thief.

Macbeth realizes that having a royal title doesn't mean much without his people's love and respect.

I have liv'd long enough: my way of life
Is fall'n into the sere, the yellow leaf;
And that which should accompany old age,
As honour, love, obedience, troops of friends,
I must not look to have; but, in their stead,
curses, not loud but deep, mouth-honour, breath,
Which the poor heart would fain deny, and dare not.

The famous "tomorrow, and tomorrow" speech, spoken by Macbeth when he hears of Lady Macbeth's death.

To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more; it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

The Wealth of Nations, by Adam Smith (up through "Treaties of Commerce")

This year I'm slowly working my way through The Wealth of Nations. What a magnificent defence and exposition of capitalism! It is however an extremely long book, and unfortunately someone else reserved it at the library just as I was getting ready to start the "Treaties of Commerce" chapter.

So, here are my favorite passages up to that point.

Adam Smith, the original work/life balance guru:

If masters would always listen to the dictates of reason and humanity, they have frequently occasion rather to moderate, than to animate the application of many of their workmen. It will be found, I believe, in every sort of trade, that the man who works so moderately, as to be able to work constantly, not only preserves his health the longest, but, in the course of the year, executes the greatest quantity of work.

He commented on why gold is valuable and speculated why it became the chief form of money.

With the greater part of rich people, the chief enjoyment of riches consists in the parade of riches, which in their eye is never so complete as when they appear to possess those decisive marks of opulence which nobody can possess but themselves.

He warned against trade lobbyists.

The proposal of any new law or regulation of commerce which comes from this order, ought always to be listened to with great precaution... It comes from an order of men, whose interest is never exactly the same with that of the public, who have generally an interest to deceive and even to oppress the public, and who accordingly have, upon many occasions, both deceived and oppressed it.

The government, the military and so on do not add to GDP, so excessive spending there can lead to a country's ruin.

Great nations are never impoverished by private, though they sometimes are by public prodigality and misconduct. The whole, or almost the whole public revenue, is in most countries employed in maintaining unproductive hands.... Such people, as they themselves produce nothing, are all maintained by the produce of other men's labour....

It is the highest impertinence and presumption, therefore, in kings and ministers, to pretend to watch over the economy of private people, and to restrain their expence, either by sumptuary laws, or by prohibiting the importation of foreign luxuries. They are themselves always, and without any exception, the greatest spendthrifts in the society.

The famous "invisible hand" quote:

... by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention...By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good. It is an affectation, indeed, not very common among merchants, and very few words need be employed in dissuading them from it.

He anticipated the kind of tyrants who would be attracted to setting up planned economies. As Credence Clearwater Revival would put it hundreds of years later, "Five year plans and New Deals, wrapped in golden chains".

The statesman, who should attempt to direct private people in what manner they ought to employ their capitals, would not only load himself with a most unnecessary attention, but assume an authority which could safely be trusted, not only to no single person, but to no council or senate whatever, and which would nowhere be so dangerous as in the hands of a man who had folly and presumption enough to fancy himself fit to exercise it.

The Winter's Tale by Shakespeare

I wasn't sure whether this was a tragedy or a comedy all the way to the 5th act. Great play. As I was reading this, I told Holly "Shakespeare is a really good writer." Duh. :)

King Leontes (wrongfully) suspects his wife Hermione of committing adultery with his best friend Polixenes. I love the last line about the tenth of mankind.

There have been,
Or I am much deceiv'd, cuckolds ere now;
And many a man there is, even at this present,
Now, while I speak this, holds his wife by th'arm,
That little thinks she has been sluic'd in's absence,
And his pond fish'd by his next neighbour, by
Sir Smile, his neighbour. Nay, there's comfort in't
Whiles other men have gates, and those gates open'd,
As mine, against their will. Should all despair
That have revolted wives, the tenth of mankind
Would hang themselves.

King Leontes accuses Antigonus of not being able to restrain his outspoken wife Paulina.

Leontes: A gross hag!
And, losel, thou art worthy to be hang'd,
That wilt not stay her tongue.

Antigonus: Hang all the husbands
That cannot do that feat, you'll leave yourself
Hardly one subject.

Imprisoned, falsely accused, and denied her children, Hermione isn't afraid of Leontes' death sentence.

Sir, spare your threats!
The bug which you would fright me with I seek.
To me can life be no commodity:
The crown and comfort of my life, your favour,
I do give lost, for I do feel it gone,
But know not how it went. My second joy,
And first-fruites of my body, from his presence
I am barr'd, like one infectious. My third comfort,
Starr'd most unluckily, is from my breast --
The innocent milk in its most innocent mouth --
Hal'd out to murder. Myself on every post
Proclaim'd a strumpet; with immodest hatred
The childbed privilege denied, which'longs
To women of all fashion; lastly, hurried
Here to this place, i'th'open air, before
I have got strength of limit. Now, my liege,
Tell me what blessings I have here alive
That I should fear to die. Therefore proceed.

Paulina accuses King Leontes after Hermione's death.

But, O thou tyrant,
Do not repent these things, for they are heavier
Than all thy woes can stir. Therefore betake thee
To nothing but despair. A thousand knees,
Ten thousand years together, naked, fasting,
Upon a barren moutain, and still winter
In storm perpetual, could not move the gods
To look that way thou wert.

The Black Swan, by Nassim Nicholas Taleb

Events both good and bad are becoming more extreme. No one really expects society to be much like today in 50 years, and yet we still predict the future based on theories about how things should work. The truth is that what will really shape the future is inherently unknowable - things like wars, disease, natural disasters, and new inventions.

I find this strangely hopeful compared to reading all the gloomy news. The real world is much more interesting and exciting than our theories and models. We need to pay more attention to reality.

I like how he twitted intellectuals, bankers, and Nobel prize winners. He's a very opinionated writer.

He referenced an ancient writer named Sextus Empiricus that I want to check out. He wrote a book called Against the Professors.

The author's day job is in trading and money management. His financial strategy is to keep almost all of his money in extremely safe investments like Treasuries or CDs. The remaining amount he risks in extremely risky ventures like venture capital. He avoids conventional blue chip stocks and so on because he feels like the risks are hidden there and almost all surprises will be negative.

Simon Foucher's Dissertation on the Search for Truth:

One needs to exit doubt in order to produce science -- but few people heed the importance of not exiting from it prematurely.... It is a fact that one usually exits doubt without realizing it.

The difference between an empirical outlook and a Platonic theoretical outlook:

I care about the premises more than the theories, and I want to minimize reliance on theories, stay light on my feet, and reduce my surprises. I want to be broadly right rather than precisely wrong. Elegance in the theories is often indicative of Platonicity and weakness -- it invites you to seek elegance for elegance's sake. A theory is like medicine (or government): often useless, sometimes necessary, always self-serving, and on occasion lethal. So it needs to be used with care, moderation, and close adult supervision.

Don't run after trains.

Snub you destiny. I have taught myself to resist running to keep on schedule. This may seem a very small piece of advice, but it registered. In refusing to run to catch trains, I have felt the true value of elegance and aesthetics in behavior, a sense of being in control of my time, my schedule, and my life. Missing a train is only painful if you run after it!

And finally...

Very few are intelligent enough to change the opinions effortlessly.