Universalism Vs Classical Economics

1820 Words8 Pages
Classical economics, which claims universality and progress for everyone, is a class biased from the start. Reflect on this statement.

Introduction

There is a general notion that classical economics is being commonly considered to be the first modern school of economic thought. The major founders and contributors to the concept of classical economics include Adam Smith, Jean-Baptiste Say, David Ricardo, Thomas Malthus and John Stuart Mill. “The Wealth of Nations” written by Adam Smith in the year 1776 marks the commencement of the era of classical economics. Classical economists do stress for unregulated markets and claims that free markets will regulate themselves in absence of state intervention. Adam Smith introduces us to the term “invisible
…show more content…
Economists are widely respected around in the society as they are believed to speak about certain vital issues with regard to economy, growth, employment and development which all have a scientific base. But still this widely accepted and valued knowledge and wisdom was based on a highly uncertain philosophy. It responded only to a certain class’ reaction to the uprising modern market mechanism. Classical economics is an economics whose commitment has always been to serve to the interest of a “specific” class. Yet we see that classical economics, which exhibits biasness, has been universalised as a scientifically proved path and it has been commonly agreed to be valid for all sections of the society in each and every situation that would guarantee progress for everyone. Economic ideas were developed by nurturing and putting together the earlier ideas of traditional western scientific rationalism. But still the ideas that were being developed using the traditional inputs doesn’t adhere to the real life situations and are not scientifically neutral. Classical economics was developed having a negative attitude towards the earlier feudal order, the landed aristocracy and the mercantilism. Whereas it had a positive and partial attitude towards the capitalist class. Being backed by the policy framework of the classical economists this new set of people labelled as the capitalists grew in volume and dominance. Profit…show more content…
He accepted Smith’s “labour theory of commodity”. He too agreed upon the point that capitalists were the agents of expanding the realm of the economic world as when capital generated in savings earned from the revenue would be used to invest in factory expansion and labour employment. Ricardo theory of free trade based on the concepts of comparative advantage was one of his important contributions to the classical economics. So the concept of classical economics hovers around the ideas of being “self –interested”, “rational” and competitive

More about Universalism Vs Classical Economics

Open Document