British India as a Problem in Political Economy: Comparing James Steuart and Adam Smith

The consolidation of political economy as a distinct branch of the science of politics was simultaneous with the expansion and diversification of the overseas British Empire. This new political economy was often regarded as distant from the enterprise of imperial expansion. Political economists criticized the mercantile system of restricted colonial trades and monopoly corporations. This chapter discusses the political economy in relation to the imperial politics in India. It takes into focus the problems of imperial politics in India, the first of which was that the East India Company’s growing empire barely fitted into the notions of a British ‘empire of liberty’ which was perceived to be ‘commercial, Protestant, maritime, and free’; and the second was the British ignorance of and lack of sympathy for local customs and manners. In the chapter, the British theorists James Steuart and Adam Smith are closely examined. Both addressed the emerging empire of British India as a dilemma in political economy. Their thinking on Indian affairs posed challenges to the Company rule in India, but at the same time offered theoretical and conceptual resources for the unpopular Company government.

Virgil and the British Empire, 1760–1880

This chapter reflects on the readings and uses of Virgil in British imperial contexts during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The British interest in Virgil heightened during the middle of the eighteenth century, when Britain was establishing its Second Empire. In the age of Elizabeth I and Shakespeare, Virgil was often deployed by writers in different imperial situations. Writers such as Edward Gibbon turned to Virgil not because of a desire to promote monarchical imperialism but with the aim of evaluating the mechanism of the empire, to explore its limits and contradictions, and to question its durability. In Victoria’s reign, when the empire in India seemed to several Britons to be long lasting, many prominent figures highlighted the providential and prophetic interpretations of Virgil, and speculated about an empire that was divinely ordained and infinite. Among these prominent personages were Tennyson, Auden, Bryce, and so on. These themes of British Empire within the context of Virgil’s writings are examined from the time of Gibbon to the Victorians, in order to describe the interweaving relationships and patterns that link Virgil and the history of the empire.

The Social Question and the Problem of History after Empire

Decolonization of the European empires in the twentieth century was spurred by the colonized based on two purposes: the desire for independence, and the desire to build a sovereign political identity. The most obvious feature of the first intention was the formation of anti-imperialist movements, organised under the banner ‘they must leave’. The latter was characterized by the establishment of constitutional government, which highlighted the identity of a novice country in a political and unified form and which featured a central source of power. These two purposes share a complex relationship. For power to be sovereign, independence must be gained first. Power cannot be obligated to the wishes of another power or constrained by the laws of another regime. The struggle for independence of European empires did not readily create the conditions for the exercise of a sovereign power. It was elusive at the moment of independence. This chapter discusses some of the implications of these two purposes, with emphasis on the second purpose and the Indian experience. It addresses questions such as: what is the meaning of collective identity to those newly independent countries in the context of politics; what were the pressures on the claims to political identity and unity; how did these pressures encourage a revolutionary mindset in the conceptualization of constitutional provisions and political power; and how does the struggle for political identity relate to the history of nation and its struggle for independence?

Harold Laski on the Habits of Imperialism

Since his death in the 1950s, most of the narratives of Harold Laski’s anti-imperialism have been mostly biographical rather than scholarly. Chroniclers and historians alike often found his genius and contribution amongst his protégés such as Krishna Menon, H.O. Davies, and other post-colonial leaders. In addition, explorations of his political theories paid little attention to his contributions to critiques on imperialism; in fact, his critics often interpreted Laski’s stand on imperialism as unoriginal. This chapter analyses two of Laski’s works on imperialism: a 1932 chapter entitled ‘Nationalism and the Future of Civilisation’ and a 1933 chapter called ‘The Economic Foundations of Peace’. The first section of the chapter analyses his theory of sovereignty and his critique of the ideological ‘habits’ that condition liberal society. The second section contends that Laski’s theory of sovereignty resulted in his framing of imperialism within Leninist terms as a dialectical relationship between the habits of sovereignty and the habits of imperialism. The chapter suggests that Laski’s thinking on imperialism resembles less a truncated Leninism than it does a critical analysis of the way ideology can obscure domination and disciple subjects. It also reveals Laski’s contradictions due to his political activism and commitment to democracy.

Colonial Emigration, Public Policy, and Tory Romanticism, 1783–1830

This chapter focuses on white colonial emigration and the settlement of the British and Irish following the loss of the first British Empire. In particular, it examines the British imaginative engagement with the figure of the colonial settler as a casualty of war, industrialization, and poverty, as well as an economic migrant who nevertheless appeared to signify the potential for the recuperation of British society in the future. The chapter is also concerned with the role of the Romantic writers and literature in the new national imaginative investment in colonial settlement. It furthermore discusses Tory arguments and policy making, which encouraged state involvement and planning of the colonization of the white-settler territories in New South Wales, Canada, the Cape, and New Zealand. This Tory strain of British imperialism was issued out from the Romantic critique of classical political economy and the Romantic assault on Malthus’s non-interventionist stance on poverty. In contrast to the liberal economists, proponents of the Tory arguments advocated the active involvement of the state in managing poverty, and the export of the excess of the population to the overseas colonies. By focusing on the Tory outlook and its implications for the settler colonies, including the imaginative dimension of the literary writers, the chapter gives a profound understanding on the strand of imperialism that evolved together with the nineteenth-century imperial liberalism, yet substantially differed from it.

Edmund Burke and Empire

This chapter discusses Edmund Burke and the British Empire. The first section discusses the background of the concept of empire as it was available to Burke and his contemporaries. The second section examines the ways in which the rise of political economy affected the perception of the empire, and in particular the tension between the political reason of the state and what were increasingly claimed to be imperatives of the international trading system. The last section evaluates Burke’s position on this controversial nexus between the empire and political economy.

‘Neither Masters nor Slaves’: Small States and Empire in the Long Eighteenth Century

In the nineteenth and twentieth century, the British Empire was viewed as a moral phenomenon. It was often described as supportive of self-government, benevolent, and respectful of the customs and laws of the dependent states of the empire. In the twentieth century, Britain became involved in world wars to defend the independence of its small states. This involvement was partially spurred by commercial interests but it was mainly because of the desire to maintain Britain’s reputation as a defender of liberty and because of its self-perception as an archetypal free state. This chapter determines the origins of the perception of Britain as defender of small states and of Europe’s small republics. It begins with an evaluation of the prevailing perspectives on the empire during the eighteenth century and the survival strategies employed by Europe’s small republics. The chapter also examines the bankruptcy of the traditional policies for maintaining national independence by the latter part of the eighteenth century. It concludes with the perception of Britain as a defender of small states by the time of the Vienna Settlement.

Lineages of Contemporary Imperialism

This chapter aims to provide a historical sketch of select major lineages in contemporary western imperialism. Contemporary western imperialism is the product of the 500 years of complex interactions between European and Euro-American imperial expansion and non-European responses. Contemporary imperialism is often studied under different headings such as neo-colonialism, open-door colonialism, post-colonialism, informal imperialism, empire, and so on. This historical sketch is limited to the aspects of contemporary imperialism collated under the heading of informal imperialism. It begins with a summary of the defining characteristics of contemporary informal imperialism. The succeeding sections describe the major historical lineages of these characteristics. The final section summarizes contemporary imperialism with the aim of a better understanding of its origins and ancestry.