Friedrich List

The political mission of Friedrich List (1789–1846) was to build an independent, industrialized national economy in Germany, and he is considered one of the architects of German economic unity. His intellectual mission was to create an alternative, “national system” to counter the universalist “cosmopolitical” economics of the Smithian school. Takahashi Korekiyo (1854–1936) was a statesman rather than a theorist, and is most famous for guiding Japan’s early recovery from the Great Depression after 1932. Takahashi’s mission was likewise to build an independent, industrialized national economy, and he was a principal framer of what would later be called the “Japanese model” of development. List, despite his six years in America and his US citizenship, was until recently almost forgotten in the English-speaking world. Takahashi, who also learned his English in America, remains largely unknown outside his home country. Together, these two economic nationalists offer an “ex-centric” picture of modern economic globalization that reverses currently dominant definitions of universal norm and local exceptionalism.

« La guerre a fait surgir les systèmes protecteurs modernes, et nous n’hésitons pas à soutenir qu’il était dans l’intérêt des puissances manufacturières de second et de troisième ordre de les maintenir et de les compléter, quand bien même, après le retour de la paix »

Following the Second World War, the United States would become the leading 'neoliberal' proponent of international trade liberalization. Yet for nearly a century before, American foreign trade policy was dominated by extreme economic nationalism. What brought about this pronounced ideological, political, and economic about face? How did it affect Anglo-American imperialism? What were the repercussions for the global capitalist order? In answering these questions, The 'Conspiracy' of Free Trade offers the first detailed account of the controversial Anglo-American struggle over empire and economic globalization in the mid- to late-nineteenth century. The book reinterprets Anglo-American imperialism through the global interplay between Victorian free-trade cosmopolitanism and economic nationalism, uncovering how imperial expansion and economic integration were mired in political and ideological conflict. Beginning in the 1840s, this conspiratorial struggle over political economy would rip apart the Republican Party, reshape the Democratic Party, and redirect Anglo-American imperial expansion for decades to come.

This article analyses the origins of the methodological nationalism that characterizes the new developmental economics by examining Friedrich List’s work. It argues that the international sphere had a primary importance in political economy from the sixteenth century onwards, and that classical political economists elaborated, although contradictorily, elements of a theory of uneven and combined development. List reinforced a vision of development as non-antagonistic, invoking extra-economic factors in order to present late industrialization as beneficial for the nation as a whole. Affirming the centrality of labour, Marx’s critique of List offers deep insights into the political economy of development.

Friedrich List and David Ricardo are two distinguished names in the field of economics, albeit coming from different interpretations of how the economy operates and affects nation-states. Their works also offer a wide spectrum of theoretical and practical tools which leads to a greater understanding of the synergy of the economy and the political and cultural systems-concepts that are indispensable in the field of Philippine Studies which believes that national progress, national identity, and national self-determination are not only a socio-cultural project but one which include all aspects of the society including the economy and the development processes embedded on it.

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.
The aim of this article is to address the influence of the main ideas of Friedrich List, an important German economist from the beginning of the 19th century who was eluded many times in the context of the great speeches of political economy. We will see specifically how List’s ideas could have an influence over the socioeconomic perspective of Alejandro Ernesto Bunge, an Argentinean engineer. Indeed, List is a pioneer of a social and economic world view which decisively impacts on Bunge, probably due to Bunge’s university education in Germany.
The raised issue does not hinder the influence of ideas from other authors from which Bunge could have drawn on during his long and versatile work career and through his various competences and publications. This article does not intend to make an exclusive nor a deterministic assertion. We merely intend to shed light on the assertions that many researches on Bunge do about List’s influence without providing many details. In order not to exceed the limits of this study, we will deal with the most paradigmatic work from each of the abovementioned authors and we will try to consider the core ideas that clearly connect the authors by means of an interpretative inquiry of their speeches.

Kibritçioğl, A. (1993): “Bebek Endüstrilerin Korunmasıyla İlgili Argümanlar: Friedrich List’inki ve Diğerleri”. Hazine ve Dış Ticaret Dergisi, 16: 67-95.

Friedrich List's Infant Industry Argument

After presenting a broad review of Friedrich List's infant industry argument (Erziehungszollargument) departing from collected works of List, this study aims to compare his ideas with that of Hamilton, Say, Mill, Bastable and Kemp. It underlines the restricted theoretical validity of the argument in modern terms of economics.

http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/2549/1/MPRA_paper_2549.pdf

The ​ formation​ ​ of​ ​ the​ ​ German​ ​ empire​ ​ is​ ​ one​ ​ that​ ​ is​ ​ unique​ ​ as​ ​ it​ ​ is​ ​ convoluted​ ​ through​ ​ its coagulation​ ​ of​ ​ numerous​ ​ different​ ​ German​ ​ governments​ ​ into​ ​ one​ ​ imperial​ ​ state.​ ​ The​ ​ foundation for​ ​ unification​ ​ in​ ​ Germany​ ​ was​ ​ not​ ​ initially​ ​ established​ ​ through​ ​ a​ ​ political​ ​ or​ ​ cultural​ ​ measure; rather,​ ​ the​ ​ foundation​ ​ of​ ​ unification​ ​ was​ ​ based​ ​ in​ ​ economics.​ ​ The​ ​ earliest​ ​ basis​ ​ from​ ​ which economics​ ​ contributed​ ​ to​ ​ the​ ​ formation​ ​ of​ ​ the​ ​ German​ ​ empire​ ​ is​ ​ the​ ​ congealing​ ​ of​ ​ a​ ​ multitude​ ​ of trade​ ​ unions​ ​ in​ ​ the​ ​ hundreds​ ​ of​ ​ old​ ​ German​ ​ states,​ ​ kingdoms,​ ​ duchies,​ ​ and​ ​ free​ ​ cities​ ​ into​ ​ the Zollverein​ ​ ​ (customs​ ​ union).​ ​ The​ ​ ​ Zollverein​ ​ ​ was​ ​ in​ ​ existence​ ​ from​ ​ 1834​ ​ to​ ​ the​ ​ formation​ ​ of​ ​ the German​ ​ empire​ ​ in​ ​ 1871​ ​ and​ ​ became​ ​ the​ ​ first​ ​ unified​ ​ German​ ​ economic​ ​ system​ ​ before​ ​ a​ ​ unified German​ ​ political​ ​ state​ ​ was​ ​ formed.​ ​ At​ ​ the​ ​ heart​ ​ of​ ​ the​ ​ economic​ ​ paradigm​ ​ of​ ​ the​ ​ ​ Zollverein​ ​ ​ lay the​ ​ economic​ ​ philosophy​ ​ of​ ​ Friedrich​ ​ List.​ ​ List​ ​ was​ ​ one​ ​ of​ ​ the​ ​ earliest​ ​ advocates​ ​ of​ ​ forming​ ​ the Zollverein​ ​ ​ as​ ​ a​ ​ way​ ​ to​ ​ assist​ ​ in​ ​ industrialization​ ​ and​ ​ strengthening​ ​ a​ ​ German​ ​ economy​ ​ that​ ​ was disjointed​ ​ following​ ​ the​ ​ Napoleonic​ ​ wars​ ​ and​ ​ the​ ​ domination​ ​ of​ ​ the​ ​ global​ ​ and​ ​ continental economy​ ​ by​ ​ the​ ​ British​ ​ Empire,​ ​ " the​ ​ lack​ ​ of​ ​ effective​ ​ political​ ​ unity​ ​ in​ ​ Germany​ ​ and​ ​ the​ ​ strength of​ ​ particularism​ ​ in​ ​ 1815​ ​ help​ ​ to​ ​ explain​ ​ the​ ​ economic​ ​ backwardness​ ​ of​ ​ the​ ​ country​ ​ in comparison​ ​ with​ ​ Britain​ ​ and​ ​ France. " ​ ​ His​ ​ economic​ ​ ideas​ ​ are​ ​ one​ ​ of​ ​ the​ ​ foundations​ ​ of​ ​ the 1 emergence​ ​ of​ ​ the​ ​ economic​ ​ policies​ ​ of​ ​ neomercantilism​ ​ in​ ​ the​ ​ 19th​ ​ century.​ ​

‘Teoria della Distruzione del Valore’: teoria elaborata da Massimo Morigi afferente al ‘Repubblicanesimo Geopolitico’, al ‘Repubblicanesimo’, al ‘Neo-repubblicanesimo’, al ‘Marxismo’ e al ‘Neo-marxismo’. Pur condividendo la critica di Karl Marx all’individualismo metodologico dell’economia classica (in specie la critica ad Adam Smith e David Ricardo, individualismo metodologico che poi sarà in seguito trasmesso anche all’economia neoclassica o marginalismo), la ‘Teoria della Distruzione del Valore’ rovescia la teoria del plusvalore di Karl Marx, affermando che il rapporto sociale che va sotto il nome di ‘capitalismo’ non opera una sottrazione del valore del lavoro erogato dal lavoratore a vantaggio del capitale ma, invece, una distruzione del valore di questo lavoro, distruzione del valore che si evidenzia sul “libero mercato” dove s’incontrano – entrambi formalmente liberi – gli operai (decisori omega-strategici), che apportano su questo mercato un lavoro svalutato (distrutto quindi nel suo valore) originatosi proprio dalla libertà di questo mercato (ossia dalla sua mancanza di regole) e i datori di lavoro capitalisti (decisori alfa-strategici) che così possono avvalersi di questo valore-lavoro effettivamente svalutato (o, meglio, distrutto).