> Would not this slow recognition [of Smith, MP] parallel the general acceptance of a
> new
> idea in the hard sciences?
No. No. There is nothing hard in Smith that was not written about elsewhere before. What made Smith popular was the fear of popular rebellion in the wake of the French Rev., 1789, not 1879. He sounded progressive, calling for high wages, but his message was acquiescence in laissez faire. As I mentioned before, his own personal goal was the transformation of the personality of the masses to become more frugal, prudent, .... The stages idea of development meant that changing the mode of production would change human character.
I fear that nobody else has any interest in this, so we should let the matter drop. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu