"Democracy, Equality and Justice is a passionate and innovative reinterpretation of the Revolutionary generation's political, economic, and social values. Drawing intellectual continuities between the work of John Adams and Adam Smith, Hill reconstructs the commercial humanism, strong sense of community, and republican virtue central to their ideas. Further, he argues that by revisiting and applying these values we might reform our own society. This is a valuable and refreshing contribution to the study of political economy, politics, and our many varieties of liberalism." Jose Torre, Author of The Political Economy of Sentiment: Paper Credit and the Scottish Enlightenment in Early Republic Boston, 1780-1820

Read more at Lexington Books!

   
   

A Hippocratic oath for capitalism? Who would be crazy enough to advocate that? Adam Smith!
John E. Hill   BookCover

That answer may surprise you because there is such widespread misunderstanding of Adam Smith, the "father of capitalism." Many books and internet sites state that Smith advocated laissez-faire (the government should stay out of the economy). He never used the term.

His approach was a subtle one: each individual should strive hard to advance economically, but should do so with justice, should do no harm to others. 

In other words, free market capitalism (which Smith certainly advocated) must include a justice component. And that brings government into the economy. One might call his system a system of liberty within boundaries.

Why should anyone care? The casino capitalism of recent decades repeatedly reaps massive gains for a few, at the cost of great harm to many.  The media provide numerous examples, such as recent stories of various deadly Chinese additives in toothpaste and pet food; history is also full of examples, such as slavery, environmental degradation, dangerous workplaces, low wages.

In short, I am arguing that a historical myth impedes a more just future for all. And I am not the only person making this argument.  Democracy, Equality, and Justice documents authors much more impressive than I who make the same or similar points.

So far, I have only commented on Adam Smith. Where does John Adams come into the picture? He, too, was grossly misinterpreted, in Adams’s case on the issue of democracy vs. aristocracy.  He argued for a balanced political system, with neither the aristocracy nor the democracy (the mob) dominating. For Adams and the founders, the common good was of prime importance; special privileges for any individual or group were anathema. Adams and Smith were completely in agreement on this, as is abundantly clear in Smith’s arguments in Wealth of Nations against the special privileges inherent in mercantilism.

The combination of Smithian capitalism (capitalism with justice) with Adams’s balanced politics (no special privileges for any group) would be a powerful system. Perhaps it is time to have a democratic free market political economy.