Joseph Persky – författare

While there had been much radical thought before John Stuart Mill, Joseph Persky argues it was Mill, as he moved to the left, who provided the radical wing of liberalism with its first serious analytical foundation, a political economy of progress that still echoes today. A rereading of Mill's mature work suggests his theoretical understanding of accumulation led him to see laissez-faire capitalism as a transitional system. Deeply committed to the egalitarian precepts of the Enlightenment, Mill advocated gradualism and rejected revolutionary expropriation on utilitarian grounds: gradualism, not expropriation, promised meaningful long-term gains for the working classes. He endorsed laissez-faire capitalism because his theory of accumulation saw that system approaching a stationary state characterized by a great reduction in inequality and an expansion of cooperative production. These tendencies, in combination with an aggressive reform agenda made possible by the extension of the franchise, promised to provide a material base for social progress and individual development.The Political Economy of Progress goes on to claim that Mill's radical political economy anticipated more than a little of Marx's analysis of capitalism and laid a foundation for the work of Fabians and other gradualist radicals in the 20th century. More recently, modern philosophic radicals, such as Rawls, have deep links to this Millean political economy. These links are still worthy of development. In particular, a politically meaningful acceptance of Rawls's radical liberalism waits on a movement capable of re-engineering the workplace in a manner consistent with Mill's endorsement of worker management.

While there had been much radical thought before John Stuart Mill, Joseph Persky argues it was Mill, as he moved to the left, who provided the radical wing of liberalism with its first serious analytical foundation, a political economy of progress that still echoes today. A rereading of Mill''s mature work suggests his theoretical understanding of accumulation led him to see laissez-faire capitalism as a transitional system. Deeply committed to the egalitarian precepts of the Enlightenment, Mill advocated gradualism and rejected revolutionary expropriation on utilitarian grounds: gradualism, not expropriation, promised meaningful long-term gains for the working classes. He endorsed laissez-faire capitalism because his theory of accumulation saw that system approaching a stationary state characterized by a great reduction in inequality and an expansion of cooperative production. These tendencies, in combination with an aggressive reform agenda made possible by the extension of the franchise, promised to provide a material base for social progress and individual development.The Political Economy of Progress goes on to claim that Mill''s radical political economy anticipated more than a little of Marx''s analysis of capitalism and laid a foundation for the work of Fabians and other gradualist radicals in the 20th century. More recently, modern philosophic radicals, such as Rawls, have deep links to this Millean political economy. These links are still worthy of development. In particular, a politically meaningful acceptance of Rawls''s radical liberalism waits on a movement capable of re-engineering the workplace in a manner consistent with Mill''s endorsement of worker management.

While there had been much radical thought before John Stuart Mill, Joseph Persky argues it was Mill, as he moved to the left, who provided the radical wing of liberalism with its first serious analytical foundation, a political economy of progress that still echoes today. A rereading of Mill''s mature work suggests his theoretical understanding of accumulation led him to see laissez-faire capitalism as a transitional system. Deeply committed to the egalitarian precepts of the Enlightenment, Mill advocated gradualism and rejected revolutionary expropriation on utilitarian grounds: gradualism, not expropriation, promised meaningful long-term gains for the working classes. He endorsed laissez-faire capitalism because his theory of accumulation saw that system approaching a stationary state characterized by a great reduction in inequality and an expansion of cooperative production. These tendencies, in combination with an aggressive reform agenda made possible by the extension of the franchise, promised to provide a material base for social progress and individual development.The Political Economy of Progress goes on to claim that Mill''s radical political economy anticipated more than a little of Marx''s analysis of capitalism and laid a foundation for the work of Fabians and other gradualist radicals in the 20th century. More recently, modern philosophic radicals, such as Rawls, have deep links to this Millean political economy. These links are still worthy of development. In particular, a politically meaningful acceptance of Rawls''s radical liberalism waits on a movement capable of re-engineering the workplace in a manner consistent with Mill''s endorsement of worker management.

Just as the Industrial Revolution in Britain suggested a promise of abundance, David Ricardo, Robert Malthus, and their colleagues formalized classical political economy with its emphasis on scarcity, self-interest, and private accumulation of capital. At the same time, Robert Owen took a different path arguing that the new technologies open a new world. In effect, his ideas turn classical political economy on its head. Building this new social science, Owen emphasizes abundance, public spiritedness, and communal accumulation of capital. Although the history of the cooperative movement is well documented, the social psychology, architecture, and logic of its economics stand in need of reappraisal. This book describes, often restates, and in places reconstructs the social science of British cooperative writers-from Robert Owen, through William Thompson and Anna Doyle Wheeler, J.S. Mill and Harriet Taylor Mill, the Christian Socialists, the consumer cooperative movement, the Women's Cooperative Guild, William Morris, and the Guild Socialists. Each of these writers makes theoretical assumptions concerning social psychology, proposes institutional structures, and then derives consequences for the material economy, happiness, and human development. Some postulate a feedback mechanism strengthening and stabilizing an enlarged self-interest. Sparked by the intellectual optimism and fellow feeling of the early British cooperative theorists, Madden and Persky start to rebuild their humane social science. While enriching our understanding of intellectual history, Building a Social Science carries insights relevant to the present concerning employment relations, persistent inequality, and low levels of human development.

Just as the Industrial Revolution in Britain suggested a promise of abundance, David Ricardo, Robert Malthus, and their colleagues formalized classical political economy with its emphasis on scarcity, self-interest, and private accumulation of capital. At the same time, Robert Owen took a different path arguing that the new technologies open a new world. In effect, his ideas turn classical political economy on its head. Building this new social science, Owen emphasizes abundance, public spiritedness, and communal accumulation of capital. Although the history of the cooperative movement is well documented, the social psychology, architecture, and logic of its economics stand in need of reappraisal. This book describes, often restates, and in places reconstructs the social science of British cooperative writers-from Robert Owen, through William Thompson and Anna Doyle Wheeler, J.S. Mill and Harriet Taylor Mill, the Christian Socialists, the consumer cooperative movement, the Women's Cooperative Guild, William Morris, and the Guild Socialists. Each of these writers makes theoretical assumptions concerning social psychology, proposes institutional structures, and then derives consequences for the material economy, happiness, and human development. Some postulate a feedback mechanism strengthening and stabilizing an enlarged self-interest. Sparked by the intellectual optimism and fellow feeling of the early British cooperative theorists, Madden and Persky start to rebuild their humane social science. While enriching our understanding of intellectual history, Building a Social Science carries insights relevant to the present concerning employment relations, persistent inequality, and low levels of human development.