In the last stages of his scholarly life, Sugihara Shiro （1920-2009） wished to collate his lifeʼs research on the history of economic thought in a four-volume work. The ti-tles of these volumes were descriptive of not only his area of research but also his peculiar viewpoint applied in those areas. In the first volume, which is on Marx, Sugi-hara essentially viewed the essence of economy in the “economy of time,” and appre-ciated Marxʼs unique insight of the dialectical relationship between necessary labor time and free disposable time. In the second volume, which is on John Stuart Mill, Sugihara considered Mill to be a sincere inquirer of human freedom, who anticipated the conditions of modern industrial society and mass democracy. The third volume deals with Kawakami Hajime, and the fourth volume, which was unpublished, is his investigation of modern Japanese economic thought using a bibliographical ap-proach.
Kawakami Hajime （1879-1946） was a special figure in Sugiharaʼs life. This is because Sugihara grew up in the academia of Kyoto, where Kawakamiʼs influence still remained, and inherited Kawakamiʼs moralistic views. This is seen also in Sugi-haraʼs study of Marx and John Stuart Mill.
In this essay, the author critically examines Sugiharaʼs new interpretation of Kawakamiʼs Bimbo Monogatari （Tales on Poverty） and suggests that the adoption of Marxism by Japanese intellectuals occurred under the influence of the Russian Revolution. In the authorʼs view, this historical context overshadows the work of sev-eral generations of Japanese intellectuals, including Sugihara. Kawakamiʼs moralist attitude did not change, even though he became a Marxist, and can be seen in his re-flections on religious truth and scientific truth during his prison years. When Sugi-hara called Kawakami a “Man on Voyage,” he seemed to be expressing his sympathy toward Kawakamiʼs quest for truth in the difficult years of the twentieth century.
JEL classification numbers: B 14, B 51, N 35.
This paper focuses on three papers by Lucas in his early career as a macroeconomist. Consider-ing Lucas and Rapping （1969）, Lucas and Pres-cott （1970）, and Lucas （1972） successively, we found that Lucasʼs first macro rational expecta-tion model was built combining his macroeco-nomic interest in labor supply and smart mathe-matical techniques to treat a stochastic process and probability. The former had arisen through research from a Keynesian perspective. The latter was the result of research on the investment function, which was parallel to Tobinʼs q theory. We can therefore conclude that Lucasʼs econom-ics was born in a more Keynesian context than has ever been thought. This historical aspect has been virtually neglected by those who thought much of ideological slogans of the macro ration-al expectation school. Lucas （1972）, which pro-vided the first macro rational expectation model, was too complicated in terms of structure. Be-sides its very structure, however, it is more important to point out that Lucas introduced to modern macroeconomic theory the concept that stochastic shocks are the main causal factors of economic fluctuations. This revived the lost leg-acy in the early history of econometric research. Lucasʼs economics turns out to have a very interesting feature from this point of view. Though it always retains general equilibrium as the reference axis, it tends to escape from the equilibrium strongly determined by the excess power of the economy. When Lucas built an endogenous growth model, he added an external effect term to Uzawaʼs production function. Such a com-pound feature of Lucasʼs economics made the Chicago school more comprehensive and truly the mainstream of contemporary macroeconom-ics.
JEL classification numbers: B 22, E 13.
John Atkinson Hobson, the leading theorist of the New Liberalism, is known as a sharp critic of imperialism. As is well known, the formative period of his social and political thought coin-cided with the heyday of social evolution theory. The purpose of this paper is to ascertain to what extent his theory of imperialism was under the influence of that theory.
In his search for a remedy for the diseases of modern industrial societies, which were under the dominion of machine production and the law of diminishing returns, he proposed to substitute qualitative for quantitative methods of consump-tion.
Thus, he adopted a qualitative view of social progress, insisting that by improving the charac-ter of consumption, the law of diminishing re-turns could be defeated, whereas the biological defenders of imperialism, such as Benjamin Kidd and Karl Pearson, maintained a quantitative view of progress, assuming that social effi-ciency and racial success were to be measured in square miles of territory within the empire.
While claiming that the struggle for exist-ence within a society should be suspended for such a society to be able to compete successfully with another society, Pearson argued that the primitive struggle for physical existence was the best method for securing progress for the society of nations, which could be called humanity.
In refuting Pearsonʼs view of progress, Hob-son asked why such a view, which claimed to put down the struggle for life among individuals and enlarge the area of social internal peace un-til it covered a whole nation, should not claim to extend its mode of progress to the complete so-ciety of the human race.
JEL classification numbers: B 14, B 15.
This paper examines British new liberal thinker
L.T. Hobhouseʼs （1864―1929） views on social reform with a particular focus on the connection between his early economic thought on volun-tary organizations and his later ethical theory of distributive justice, and demonstrates that these aspects of his thought were theoretically com-plementary, together composing Hobhouseʼs life-long pursuit of the moralization of capital-ism.
In the 1890s, Hobhouse already shared with contemporaneous new liberals several moralistic concerns over the issue of social reform. They all （1） thought of the development of morality as the fundamental aim of social reform and （2） emphasized the stateʼs duty to provide individu-als with the legal conditions necessary for moral development. Early in his career, Hobhouse fo-cused on the first point, identifying trade unions and co-operative societies as effective agencies for instilling in workers the values of fellowship
and mutual aid. Hobhouse developed his ideas on state inter-ference after the 1910s, particularly from the perspective of distributive justice. Individuals were considered to have reciprocal rights and duties in relation to others and the state: they were seen as having the right to demand legal, material and social conditions sufficient for de-veloping their moral personalities and the duty to undertake their own social functions. A just distribution ensured by the state was seen as be-ing one that was capable of maintaining the per-formance of such functions.
Hobhouse saw the roles of intermediate or-ganizations and the state as complementary, thus developing new liberal thought on social reform from a pluralistic-cum-moralistic perspective. To what extent this “ethical welfare pluralism” was common at the turn of the century would be a question worth examining in the historical study of the British welfare state.
JEL classification numbers: B 19, B 31, I 31.
This paper is an outline of studies on the political economist David Ricardo in Japan after World War II. Japanese studies on Ricardo have followed the Japanese tradi-tional learning style of thoroughly reading the original texts, and recent research has broadened to include Ricardoʼs contemporaries. Additionally, and particularly since the foundation of the Ricardo Society in Japan in 2000, researchers have endeavored to send their information to other countries. In the first section of this paper, I survey the articles about Ricardo, and in the second section, I trace the historical progress of Japanese studies. I divide their approximately 70 years of Japanese research into three periods: the postwar period to the 1960s, the 1970s to the 1980s, and the 1990s to today. The final section contains perspectives on Japanese studies on Ricardo.
JEL classification numbers: A 12, B 12, B 31.