Economics and the Mutation of Political Doctrine

  • A. M. C. Waterman
Part of the Studies in Modern History book series (SMH)

Abstract

The term “political economy” seems to have entered modern discourse for the first time in 1611 in a treatise on government by L. de Mayerne-Turquet.1 Four years later a fellow “Consultant Administrator,” Antoyne de Montchrétien, Sieur de Watteville (c.1575–1621), published his Traicté de l’oeconomie politique (1615), which though “a mediocre performance and completely lacking in originality,”2 marks the beginning of an intellectual enterprise that has continued — with some large ups and downs — to this day. The object of that enterprise is to generalize Aristotle’s οικονομικη (“economics”) to the level of the πολιτεια (“commonwealth” or “state”). For in Aristotle’s Politics3 “economics” is to be construed as “the art of household management” where “household” means a more or less self-sufficient, manorial estate. Hence at the outset “political economy” was an attempt to extend the art of estate management to the needs and resources of a modern nation state, of which France was in the 1600s the foremost example.

Keywords

Political Economy Socialist Economy Pareto Optimality Phillips Curve Invisible Hand 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 3.
    Aristotle, The Politics, trans. (1967) Rackham, pp. 31–2.Google Scholar
  2. 8.
    Waterman (1998) “Reappraisal of ‘Malthus the Economist’, 1933–97,” History of Political Economy, 30: pp. 303–4, 312–13.Google Scholar
  3. 12.
    Waterman (1991c), Revolution, Economics and Religion, pp. 28–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 16.
    Waterman (1996), “Why William Paley was ‘the First of the Cambridge Economists,’” Cambridge Journal of Economics, 20: 673–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 29.
    Mill (1848), Principles of Political Economy with Some of Their Applications to Social Philosophy, p. 922, ed. (1909) Ashley. Hereafter cited as Mill, Principles of Political Economy.Google Scholar
  6. 37.
    Marshall (1890), Principles of Economics, p. viii, 8th edn 1952. Hereafter cited as Marshall, Principles. Google Scholar
  7. 49.
    Dupuit (1844), “On the Measurement of the Utility of Public Works,” trans. (1952) Barback in International Economic Papers, no. 2.Google Scholar
  8. 50.
    Gossen (1854), Entwickelung der Gesetze des menschliches Handeln.Google Scholar
  9. 51.
    Jevons (1862) “Brief Account of a General Mathematical Theory of Political Economy,” in Jevons (1871), The Theory of Political Economy, republished 1957. Hereafter cited as Jevons, Theory of Political Economy. Google Scholar
  10. 52.
    Waterman (1998), “Malthus, Mathematics and the Mythology of Coherence,” History of Political Economy 30, pp. 579–80.Google Scholar
  11. 54.
    Menger (1871), Principles of Economics, trans. (1950) Dingwall and Hoselitz.Google Scholar
  12. 55.
    Walras (1874), Elements of Pure Economics, trans (1954) Jaffē.Google Scholar
  13. 61.
    Pareto (1896), Cours d’Économie Politique and Pareto (1908) Manual of Political Economy.Google Scholar
  14. 63.
    Edgeworth (1881), Mathematical Psychics.Google Scholar
  15. 67.
    Barone (1908), “The Ministry of Production in the Collectivist State,” trans (1935) Hayek.Google Scholar
  16. 68.
    Wieser (1893), Natural Value, republished 1971.Google Scholar
  17. 120.
    Waterman (1966) “Some footnotes to the ‘Swan Diagram’: or, How Dependent is a Dependent Economy?,” Economic Record, 42, 447–64; cf. Swan (1960).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Anthony Waterman 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. M. C. Waterman
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.St John’s CollegeWinnipegCanada
  2. 2.University of ManitobaCanada

Personalised recommendations