More on Scrooge

I’ve written before on the insistence some conservatives have that Christmas Carol is fatally flawed because Dickens just doesn’t get economics. If Bob Cratchitt’s work were worth more, Scrooge would pay him more. The Cratchitt Christmas dinner is wildly expensive. The real story is Scrooge, a man who earned lots of money, trying to protect his rightful wealth from moochers, spongers and leeches who want to get it from him while condemning him for it!
My response in the link above was that Dickens’ point is moral, not systemic. He’s not calling for a minimum wage or for the redistribution of income, he’s suggesting capitalism works much better if the rich aren’t horrible, mean-spirited human beings (the book is about a lot more than that, but that’s certainly a thread).
As someone notes in this alicublog comments thread, the Scrooge Was Right arguments are even feebler than I wrote before. Dickens never suggests that Scrooge’s wealth should be confiscated or redistributed. He suggests it’s Scrooge’s moral duty—and sure enough, Scrooge is filled by the end of the book with the joy of Christmas and the spirit of Christian charity. That’s what drives him to give. And it’s his money, so why not support his right to do so?
Probably because current conservatism is a bizarre hybrid of Ayn Rand and the Gospels and this just shows the two don’t fit well together.
Other odd theories of Scrooge I ran across recently:
•Scrooge isn’t a real capitalist because he supports tax money going to the poor via the English workhouses.
In the first place, Scrooge doesn’t say he supports this. He simply says that as his tax money is going to the poor, he sees no reason to give more. Not The Same.
Second, the claim that no capitalist would accept government money is, well, laughable. Farmers, drug companies, tech companies, banks, the oil industry, sports teams wanting new stadiums—they all have their hand out (Which as I’ve noted before, doesn’t seem to bother conservatives). If someone wants to argue “they’re not true capitalists” either, fine, but I think it’s safe to say we’ll never meet any true capitalists.
•Scrooge’s nephew was an irresponsible spender. Unlike Scrooge he didn’t understand the importance of saving.
The trouble with this one is, we’re never given any sign that Frank is actually poor. Scrooge says so, but from the glimpses we get, Frank is living a comfortable middle-class existence. It may be that buying those things and supporting a wife has strained Frank’s purse. But Scrooge, who was happy to end his relationship with his one-time love, is hardly the best judge of such things.
All these theories prefer to ignore that before his conversion, even Scrooge is miserable. He doesn’t enjoy his wealth beyond whatever satisfaction he gets from mere possession. He treats himself as stingily and miserably as he treats Bob Cratchitt. By learning to give and care he makes himself happier, as well as the people around him.
Hmmm … again, that sounds like an idea a lot of right-wingers would rather not think about.