They're a Barrel of Laughs

A fascinating post up at Marginal Revolution allows me to follow up on two favorite themes:

1) Academics aren’t very nice people; and

2) Economists don’t have much sense of humor.

I’ll take them in reverse order. For starters, here is Alex Tabarrok:

Call me a masochist but one of the great pleasures of being at George Mason is that I am regularly insulted by Gordon Tullock.

Tabarrok offers examples and invites others. Here are a few:

• "Gordon," I asked, "do you think we should ban child labor?" "No, keep working."
• "You Austrian guys are nuts, but at least you're enthusiastic!"
• Every day (we are both in) Gordon passes my door and barks out "Work harder!" That's just one of many...

Uh, this stuff is funny? “Funny” is “I never forget a face, but in your case, I’ll make an exception.” Funny is “You are as rheumatic as two dry toasts.” Funny is “You mama so black she go to night school they mark her absent.” “Work harder!” is just stupid. Indeed, nothing here rises above the level of 11-year-old schoolyard stuff. If this is what passes for comedy in the economics department, I think I’ll check out the anthropologists.

There is some instructive discussion in the commentary, but what catches me is how much of the stuff is dedicated to certifying that Tullock is really wonderful—not just in spite but because of his gratuitous rudness. Says Tabarrok: “[O]ne of the great pleasures of being at George Mason is that I am regularly insulted by Gordon Tullock.” Many of the commentators seem to agree.

Needless to say, I’m not impressed, but I want to consider a different point. That is: surely there are pompous twits in any field--as a wise man has said, the number of horses' asses in general exceeds the number of horses. But can it be that there is something about academic life that positively encourages this sort of thing? I’m not saying we should hire for courtesy and civility—life would be pretty dull if we did. But there does seem to be a tendency to infer that, if an academic is rude, arrogant, self-absorbed and combatative, then he ought to be fast-tracked for the Nobel Prize.

Afterthought: I’m not I psychologist and I’ve never met Tullock, but I don’t see why that should inhibit me from messing with his head. My guess is that it’s all a cover. Here is a guy with a reasonable shot at a Nobel Prize, but apparently also with a mortal fear of not getting it. If you don’t get it, then it may be a consolation to say that it is the malice of your enemies.

Technical Afterthought: A comment says that “Tullock and Krueger” are due the Nobel for rent-seeking. Why not Bhagwati?

Parting Shot: Here is a real insult:

“"Sir, your wife, under pretense of keeping a bawdy-house, is a

receiver of stolen goods." 

                                                                --Samuel Johnson