Explore the vast range of titles available.

At a time when critiques of free trade policies are gaining currency, The Neomercantilists helps make sense of the protectionist turn, providing the first intellectual history of the genealogy of neomercantilism. Eric Helleiner identifies many pioneers of this ideology between the late eighteenth and early twentieth centuries who backed strategic protectionism and other forms of government economic activism to promote state wealth and power. They included not just the famous Friedrich List, but also numerous lesser-known thinkers, many of whom came from outside of the West. Helleiner's novel emphasis on neomercantilism's diverse origins challenges traditional Western-centric understandings of its history. It illuminates neglected local intellectual traditions and international flows of ideas that gave rise to distinctive varieties of the ideology around the globe, including in Latin America, the Caribbean, Africa, and Asia. This rich history left enduring intellectual legacies, including in the two dominant powers of the contemporary world economy: China and the United States. The result is an exceptional study of a set of profoundly influential economic ideas. While rooted in the past, it sheds light on the present moment. The Neomercantilists shows how we might construct more global approaches to the study of international political economy and intellectual history, devoting attention to thinkers from across the world, and to the cross-border circulation of thought.

El objetivo de este artículo consiste en tratar la influencia de las principales ideas de Friedrich List, importante economista alemán de principios del siglo XIX, muchas veces soslayado en el mapa de los grandes discursos de la economía política. Veremos puntualmente cómo esas ideas tendrían un importante ascendente sobre la perspectiva socioeconómica del ingeniero argentino Alejandro Ernesto Bunge. En efecto, List se constituye en pionero de una cosmovisión económica y social, que repercute decisivamente en Bunge, muy probablemente a causa de la formación universitaria de éste en Alemania. Lo planteado no obsta a la influencia de las ideas de una diversidad de autores de los que se pudo haber nutrido Bunge en su extensa y versátil trayectoria, y en sus diversas incumbencias y publicaciones. No se busca aquí formular una aserción excluyente ni determinista. Simplemente, pretendemos echar luz sobre la aseveración que acerca de la influencia listiana muchas investigaciones sobre Bunge hacen sin darnos mayores precisiones. A efectos de no exceder los límites de este trabajo, abordaremos la obra más paradigmática de cada uno de estos dos autores en examen, tratando de avizorar, a través de una indagación interpretativa de sus discursos, aquellos ejes que a nuestro juicio los conectan palmariamente.

This paper re-examines the works of Friedrich List and argues that he had a vision of how to promote economic and social development from the initial state of an advanced agricultural society that has been distorted in the trade policy for development debate. It shows that his vision is much broader than the orthodox label of ‘protectionism’ conveys. He thus proposed many methods of promoting development, cautioned and suggested measures against the drawbacks of protection, and emphasised exports. It is hoped that this paper will contribute to the debate on the wisdom behind the current push toward trade liberalisation.

\"Economists and Societies is the first book to systematically compare the profession of economics in the United States, Britain, and France, and to explain why economics, far from being a uniform science, differs in important ways among these three countries. Drawing on in-depth interviews with economists, institutional analysis, and a wealth of scholarly evidence, the author traces the history of economics in each country from the late nineteenth century to the present, demonstrating how each political, cultural, and institutional context gave rise to a distinct professional and disciplinary configuration. She argues that because the substance of political life varied from country to country, people's experience and understanding of the economy, and their political and intellectual battles over it, crystallized in different ways - through scientific and mercantile professionalism in the United States, public-minded elitism in Britain, and statist divisions in France. Fourcade moves past old debates about the relationship between culture and institutions in the production of expert knowledge to show that scientific and practical claims over the economy in these three societies arose from different elites with different intellectual orientations, institutional entanglements, and social purposes. Much more than a history of the economics profession, the book is a revealing exploration of American, French, and British society and culture as seen through the lens of their respective economic institutions and the distinctive character of their economic experts.\" Die Untersuchung enthält quantitative Daten. Forschungsmethode: deskriptive Studie; historisch. Die Untersuchung bezieht sich auf den Zeitraum 1890 bis 2000. (author's abstract, IAB-Doku).

This is the first-ever English translation of an 1891 essay by Carl Menger published in the most important newspaper of the Habsburg Empire, the Neue Freie Presse. Menger writes the piece as a defense of classical political economy in general and of Adam Smith in particular, focusing on misinterpretations of Smith's work by the Younger Historical School in Germany. The essay reveals that Menger saw himself as working in a liberal tradition going back to Smith and classical political economy, rather than as a marginalist revolutionary who broke with classical political economy. It is a rare instance where Menger, holding the chair of economic theory at the University of Vienna, publicly expresses recommendations on economic policy. The essay represents Smith and the other classical political economists as socially motivated scholars concerned with just reforms to benefit ordinary people. Menger argues that the classical political economists were inclined toward liberal reforms but were by no means rigid exponents of laissez-faire. The essay is preceded here by an introduction authored by the translators Erwin Dekker and Stefan Kolev.

This study proposes a historical reconstruction of Friedrich List’s economic thought, highlighting his background as intellectual and bureaucrat. It outlines the German author’s contribution to the consolidation of the American System of Political Economy, as well as the influence of Historicism and German Idealism in building his analytical historical method. It is noteworthy the importance of Zollverein and the National System of Railroad Transport proposed by List in accelerating Germany’s unification process.

Arguing that Joseph Schumpeter generalized development economics, whereas List saw it as of limited scope, we take a closer look at List's approach. We discover that, for List, theories are time- and space-bound, and historical and institutional parameters help define their applicability. When history and institutions matter, mere internal dynamics cannot be taken as the sole motor-force of development and change. While Schumpeter's approach is associated with evolutionary economics, List's is affiliated with institutional economics. Institutional economics and evolutionary economics are not exactly the same but they are not poles apart either. This holds the key to understanding the uneasy yet inevitable combination to which List and Schumpeter contribute in the context of contemporary development-friendly economics. It is in this vein that we attempt to compare, contrast and somewhat synthesize List and Schumpeter in terms of their conceptions of capitalist development and economic evolution.

Engels discussed tariff and the related issues on many occasions in his writings. Using “tariff” as the keyword, we search all the 50 volumes of Marx and Engels Collected Works and find out two important stages in which Engels formulated intensively tariff and related issues. The first one is 1845–1853, when Engels mainly elaborated from the perspective of the impact of tariffs on the interests of various classes in the European nations, and the second one is 1879–1893, when he mainly elaborated from the perspective of the relation between tariff policies and the stage of economic development in the United States and the roles played by the tariff policies in the national competition. At the second stage, standing at the height of world history and starting from competition and evolution, Engels made a comprehensive and in-depth illustration of the changes in the US tariff policies and their roles; at this stage, he recognized to a certain extent some of List's thoughts on tariff, which is not in conflict with his criticism of List at the first stage. The essence of Engels's thoughts on tariffs is the multi-level investigation based on his profound historical insight and grand global vision. Engels's thoughts of the political economy formulated on the development and evolution of the tariff policies and their roles and mechanisms after the US Civil War are still of great practical significance even for nowadays.

This book, the first of its kind, provides a sweeping critical history of social theories about war and peace from Hobbes to the present. Distinguished social theorists Hans Joas and Wolfgang Knöbl present both a broad intellectual history and an original argument as they trace the development of thinking about war over more than 350 years--from the premodern era to the period of German idealism and the Scottish and French enlightenments, and then from the birth of sociology in the nineteenth century through the twentieth century. While focusing on social thought, the book draws on many disciplines, including philosophy, anthropology, and political science. Joas and Knöbl demonstrate the profound difficulties most social thinkers--including liberals, socialists, and those intellectuals who could be regarded as the first sociologists--had in coming to terms with the phenomenon of war, the most obvious form of large-scale social violence. With only a few exceptions, these thinkers, who believed deeply in social progress, were unable to account for war because they regarded it as marginal or archaic, and on the verge of disappearing. This overly optimistic picture of the modern world persisted in social theory even in the twentieth century, as most sociologists and social theorists either ignored war and violence in their theoretical work or tried to explain it away. The failure of the social sciences and especially sociology to understand war, Joas and Knöbl argue, must be seen as one of the greatest weaknesses of disciplines that claim to give a convincing diagnosis of our times.

Max Weber's path to economic science was impacted to a large degree by political motives. The question emerges how the depiction, which has been maintained by historians of economics, of Weber as a methodologist - who demands objectivity and value freedom in scientific analysis - is compatible with the view of a young, politically-minded economist who, even from the university lectern, did not shy away from personal value judgments? The manuscripts first published recently in the context of the Max Weber-Gesamtausgabe on his lectures Praktische Nationalokonomie (1895 -1899) reveal that Weber distinguished sharply between value judgments and scientific analysis - not in order to suppress the former, but in order to be clear about his ultimate goals and its consequences at all times and to elevate these to guide his thinking in practical questions of political economy. Keywords: Max Weber, Economic Sociology, Political Economy, Nation JEL Codes: N13, P16, P48, Z13