List learned a lot from his experience inn the US 1825-1832 and his contact with the US economists, especially Hamilton, Clay, Matthew Carey and: Daniel Raymond! However, before that he had learned a lot from his stay in exile in Paris. Charles Dupin, and from the professor at the same university as his own: Tübingen, namely James Steuart.
2) The economists who founded the American Association of Economists were in fact educated in Germany. Many of these German educated professors formed the core of what became the US economic tradition of institutionalism. As they died in the 1950s and 1960s, the monetarists took over.
Protectionism was part of the larger role of government in promoting industrialization that characterizes late industrializers (as compared to early industrializers, i.e., England),
Concerning Britain: She too used the same strategy to build her industry faced with competition from the leader at that time: The Nettherlands (check a dictionary for expressions on "Dutch" and you will see how much the English loved the Dutch supremacy and their informal colony in the City of London.
On top of that, it should be noticed that the unification of Germany in many ways meant the _increase in free trade_: many of the large number of German mini-states used tariffs as a major source of tax revenue; these were abolished with the establisment of the Zollverrein (sp?)
Quite, the classic state mercantilist strategy is internal free trade and external (moderate and temporal) barriers to trade, thereby emulating a city state by developing dense infrastructure.
BTW, a protectionist/autarkic strategy sort of makes sense for Russia: first we have to make our domestic economy actually work; then we can deal with international trade. Of course, I'm afraid that that type of autarky would be linked to the worst kind of national chauvanism.
Why Jim?? Not necessarily?
Best! Arno
-----Original Message----- From: owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com [mailto:owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com] On Behalf Of James Devine Sent: Saturday, September 26, 1998 4:42 PM To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com Subject: RE: Friedrich List & Franz Neumann -or here: Bismarck
At 12:29 PM 9/26/98 +0200, you wrote:
>Gregory P. Nowell wrote: >>Autarchic theory is deeply rooted in German
experience and I think the Nazis could have come up with their ideas with
or wihtout List.<
I'm not sure what is meant by "deeply rooted in German experience" but I guess I agree with the general sentiment. German experience with autarchy started when Napoleon conquered the various German states and then found himself slapped by a British blockade. This caused a short-lived hothouse style import-substituting growth process. And of course, people like Alexander Hamilton favored government replacements for the natural protection of industry arising from high transportation and communication costs across the Atlantic and the accidental protection arising from wars. Especially after the Civil War, the US pursued a import-subsituting industrialization behind tariff walls, taking advantage of the large domestic market. (A very successful story, I might add.)
In many ways, the Germans were imitating the US. (while I bet the US learned from Germany). The Germans' tendency toward autarchy arose from the fact that the Brits were dominating the world market in manufacturing. They had to pursue protection or get stuck with a comparative advantage in agricultural commodities and ores. Protectionism was part of the larger role of government in promoting industrialization that characterizes late industrializers (as compared to early industrializers, i.e., England), according to Alexander Gershenkron.
On top of that, it should be noticed that the unification of Germany in many ways meant the _increase in free trade_: many of the large number of German mini-states used tariffs as a major source of tax revenue; these were abolished with the establisment of the Zollverrein (sp?)
BTW, a protectionist/autarkic strategy sort of makes sense for Russia: first we have to make our domestic economy actually work; then we can deal with international trade. Of course, I'm afraid that that type of autarky would be linked to the worst kind of national chauvanism.
Jim Devine jdevine at popmail.lmu.edu & http://clawww.lmu.edu/Departments/ECON/jdevine.html