Sustainable agriculture and free market economics: Finding common ground in Adam Smith

2006 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 427-438 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harvey S. James
Author(s):  
John Tomasi

This chapter offers an intellectual history of liberalism, focusing on the classical view that was eventually displaced by modern, “high” liberalism. It first considers classical liberalism's notion of equality and property rights as well as economic liberty before discussing the ideas of thinkers like John Locke, Adam Smith, David Hume, and F. A. Hayek. It then explores the emergence of market society, with particular emphasis on what Smith called “the system of natural liberty.” It also examines classical liberal ideas in action during under revolutionary America and concludes with an analysis of the essential features of classical liberalism: a thick conception of economic liberty grounded mainly in consequentialist considerations; a formal conception of equality that sees the outcome of free market exchanges as largely definitive of justice; and a limited but important state role in tax-funded education and social service programs.


Author(s):  
Conor Lucey

Borrowing its title from the notorious seventeenth-century speculative builder Nicholas Barbon’s seminal work on free market economics, published in 1685, the introduction offers a new apology for a much-maligned member of the architectural community: the building artisan. Taking the form of a discursive chapter in its own right, it weaves together a critical literature review with an extended analysis of the artisan’s place within architectural, design and cultural histories. Topics include the adverse effect of eighteenth and nineteenth-century criticisms of the building community on modern scholarship, distinctions between intellectual and manual labour in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, and the systemic problems arising from a new literature devoted to British Atlantic world studies.


2021 ◽  
pp. 13-26
Author(s):  
Ian Cummins

Polanyi (1957) described the notion of a self-regulating global system a “stark Utopia.” This chapter uses this as a starting point to examine the broad themes in the development of welfare and penal policy in a period dominated by free market economics Fukuyama (1992) presents the triumph of free market economics as an inevitable conclusion of trends in human history. It is also presented as the final stage development has ceased or is complete. Polanyi’s analysis is presented a counterpoint to this analysis. Polanyi asserts the primacy of politics. Thus, it is impossible to separate economic and political development. Prosperity of the post war period can thus be viewed as a direct result of the advances in politics and civil society that occurred in the period.


2010 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 74-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leo Panitch

AbstractGiovanni Arrighi made a remarkably broad-ranging and original contribution to comparative political economy and historical sociology over five decades. His last book shares these qualities. But Adam Smith in Beijing is unfortunately not mainly about the origins and dynamics of Chinese capitalism over the past three decades. It presents Adam Smith not as the apostle of free-market capitalism, but rather of a ‘non-capitalist market society’; and it uses this to make the case that since China’s economic development takes place outside the European/North American capitalist ‘core’, it must, almost by definition, not be capitalist. Markets are conceived here as the instruments of states, yet the theory of the state advanced is severely undeveloped. Arrighi’s argument that China’s economic development is part and parcel of the demise of the US project for establishing itself as the ‘world state’ misinterprets the nature of the US empire as well as misses the extent of China’s integration with US-led capitalist globalisation.


2009 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 513-538 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANGUS BURGIN

This article examines the most prominent interwar economist at the University of Chicago, Frank Knight, through the lens of a controversial 1932 lecture in which he exhorted his audience to vote Communist. The fact that he did so poses a historical problem: why did the premier American exponent of conservative economic principles appear to advocate a vote for radical change? This article argues that the speech is representative of Knight's deliberately paradoxical approach, in which he refused to praise markets without adding caveats about their substantial limitations, and expressed support for freedom of discussion alongside his skepticism of the public's capacity to exercise the privilege. In parsing these tensions, the article revises the conventional interpretation of Knight, illuminates the contested environment within which postwar free-market economics emerged, and reexamines a restrained defense of capitalism that has been largely forgotten in the subsequent years.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document