経済学史研究
Online ISSN : 1884-7358
Print ISSN : 1880-3164
ISSN-L : 1880-3164
最新号
選択された号の論文の3件中1~3を表示しています
  • 道徳的諸信念・自生的秩序・専門家主義
    今池 康人
    2020 年 62 巻 1 号 p. 1-25
    発行日: 2020年
    公開日: 2020/10/16
    ジャーナル オープンアクセス
    This paper examines Michael Polanyi’s views on liberty. Polanyi was a scholar with expertise in several fields of study. He began his academic career as a physical chemist and later became a philosopher. He then studied economics, liberalism, and philosophy. Many researchers have shown interest in his arguments on religion and knowledge. However, an inquiry into his views on liberty is seemingly lacking. Polanyi distinguished between personal (including that classified as negative) and public liberty (including that classified as positive) and believed that we should protect public liberty. His theory comprises three elements. First, Polanyi emphasized moral belief among people living in a free society. He focused on British traditions and suggested that morality is also influenced by British tradition. Second, Polanyi clarified the role played by spontaneous order in society. He placed particular emphasis on an intellectual order (law, science, and so on). In a free society, people’s actions yield better results because their behaviors are mutually adjusted as a function of the spontaneous order. The third premise in Polanyi’s theory asserted that a free society requires that its leaders be professionals, which I call “professionalism.” After writing The Logic of Liberty, Polanyi moved on to other fields of research, such as knowledge, religion, and so on. Here, it should be mentioned that all of Polanyi’s research across various fields is related to his study on liberty. JEL classification numbers: A12, B31.
  • 経済的ナショナリズムと自由貿易主義国際平和論との相克
    松永 友有
    2020 年 62 巻 1 号 p. 26-50
    発行日: 2020年
    公開日: 2020/10/16
    ジャーナル オープンアクセス
    John Maynard Keynes is known to have frequently changed his opinion on free trade and protection. There have been two contrasting interpretations of Keynes’s thought on the external economic policy, with one considering him essentially a free trader and the other finding him a protectionist. This article elucidates an original coherent explanation for Keynes’s ambiguous thinking on Britain’s external economic policy by observing the contradictory coexistence of economic nationalism and pacifist free-trade ideology among the New Liberals (left-leaning Liberals), of whom he was one. Since the 19th century, Britain had a peculiar political tradition in that the proposal of a protectionist policy almost entirely came from the political right, whereas the political left monolithically supported unconditional free trade under the influence of Richard Cobden’s idealistic internationalism. New Liberals, such as J.A. Hobson and Keynes, were sympathetic to the vision of a balanced national economy in which the manufacturing, rather than the financial sector, played a central role. In this sense, New Liberals had much in common with the historical economists, such as William Cunningham and William Ashley, who supported the Conservative Party’s protectionist campaign. Both Hobson’s theory of underconsumption and Keynes’s theory of effective demand emphasized the importance of domestic, rather than foreign markets. This meant that the New Liberals’ economic thinking was essentially more congruent with a protectionist policy to safeguard domestic manufacturing industries than free trade. Nevertheless, the New Liberals found it extremely difficult to support a protectionist policy because of protectionism’s strong association with right-wing politics in Britain and its incommensurability with their belief in a pacifist free-trade ideology. This dilemma formed the backdrop of Keynes’s allegedly inconsistent attitudes on the external economic policy of his time. JEL classification numbers: B10, B20, B27.
  • 八木 紀一郎, チャペスキー ロバート, 玉野井 芳郎
    2020 年 62 巻 1 号 p. 51-75
    発行日: 2020年
    公開日: 2020/10/16
    ジャーナル オープンアクセス
feedback
Top