Selected Elements of Henry George's Legitimacy as an Economist

A bstract . Henry George's legitimacy as an economist has been denied in much of the literature of the history of economic thought and by some economists who were his approximate contemporaries. These denials have shaped the prevailing negative view of George's economics. An examination of selected representative evidence from George's work fails to support the negative view. George's positions on "The Study of Political Economy," eloquently presented in his 1877 speech to the faculty at the University of California, ate consistent with (and predate) "accepted,""orthodox,""legitimate" views of political economy expressed a decade and more later by J. Laurence Laughlin and Charles F. Dunbar in early classic articles that signified the emergence of economics as an identifiable profession in the United States. Other evidence reveals that George avoided the Ricardian error of failing to understand the role of factor and product substitution in the process of market equilibrium adjustments.     

Frank H. Knight's Criticism of Henry George

A bstract .   The ferocity of Knight's comments on Henry George may come as a surprise to those who are not familiar with his criticisms of other economists and philosophers. But, in fact, his criticisms of George are not due to specifically Knightian insights on George's approach, but rather reflect the different philosophical framework from which neoclassical economists like Knight think. At the core of Knight's disagreements with George is his neoclassical theory of rent, as the Georgist critics of Knight understand. The article reviews the philosophical, economic, and ethical ideas that underlay Knight's neoclassicism, and hence inform his criticism of George.     

Seeking Institutionalist Signposts in The Work of Henry George

A bstract . When one seeks institutionalist signposts in works published before the time of Thorstein Veblen, Henry George is often overlooked. This oversight on the part of institutionalists is understandable given George's emphasis on " natural laws," individualism, religious teachings and his defense of the market system. Orthodox economists have also ignored these signposts as a result of their rejection of institutionalism. They have rejected George's work in general because of his attack on the economics profession and his challenge to the status quo. While George is usually not classified an institutionalist, there are, however, definite institutionalist signposts to be found in his work. George recognized the ceremonial and pecuniary nature of the economics profession and analyzed the institutional foundation of property. Furthermore, George was a social reformer and understood the discretionary and normative nature of the economy.     

Henry George's Ingenious Tax

A bstract . Henry George (1839–1897) has left an intellectual legacy which is shrouded under a cloak of controversy. "Professional economists who focused attention on the single-tax proposal and condemned Henry George's teaching, root and branch, were hardly just to him." (Schumpeter 1954, p. 865). This essay tries to do justice to Henry George from the point of view of economic theory and relevant economic practical questions in 1997. The single tax proposal is looked at from the point of view of constitutional economics, and the wider applicability of Henry George's basic notions is emphasized.     

Henry George and Classical Growth Theory: A Significant Contribution to Modeling Scale Economies

It is widely recognized that the analysis of economic growth in Henry George's Progress and Poverty was considerably influenced by the British classical tradition, especially the writings of Adam Smith, David Ricardo, and John Stuart Mill. What has been less clearly perceived is that George made significant extensions to the classical theory. This paper's aim is to provide an interpretation, and to some extent a "rational reconstruction," of George's positive analysis, largely leaving aside the striking normative lessons he drew from it. George's unsatisfactory treatment of capital is disposed of in Section I, while Section II—the core of the paper—follows George's lead in aggregating capital and labor into a single productive factor which is employed in a given natural environment. Section III adds the complication of improvement in the arts of production, and Section IV deals briefly with George's views on land speculation. Section V assesses, comparing George with his contemporary Alfred Marshall.     

Henry George and George Bernard Shaw: Comparison and Contrast

A bstract . Henry George , the American economist and social philosopher , and George Bernard Shaw , the British playwright and social reformer , were two famous personalities of the last quarter of the 19th century, each a prophet in his own way. The two men probably never met, though Shaw credited George's oratory as well as his classic. Progress and Poverty , with awakening his interest in economic issues, and to his last days acknowledged his debt to George. Both were deeply committed to ending poverty. But there the similarity ended—George was devoted to ethical democracy, Shaw to socialist dictatorship. George saw cooperative individualism as the goal of social reconstruction; Shaw dreamed of a Superman, and fancied himself a supporter of the Soviet dictator, Joseph Stalin, and of Soviet Russian'communism.'Shaw saw the purpose of life as "being used for a (mighty) purpose;" George saw it as blazing a trail for'progressive humanity,'cooperating with the Creator in creating a moral world.     

Henry George and Europe

A bstract . In the eyes of European scholars, publicists and politicians who studied Henry George's work, he, as a social philosopher , had adopted the position of the natural law philosophers of the 18th century. The latter inspired the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution and its Bill of Rights, as well as the poiitical philosophy of Jeffersonian democracy , the ethos of the 18th and 19th century pioneer settlers. George rejected Social Darwinism. He saw natural law as the only true and reliable basis for a just social order. Like Karl Marx he mastered Ricardian economics ; unlike Marx, George made two factors the basis of his system, labor and land. George saw that each person had a natural right —and a natural imperative for survival —to apply his or her productive capacity to the earth –as living space and as storehouse of nutrients and raw materials. The person-land relationship , he discovered, lay at the basis of human culture. And so the land's rent , now monopolized by the few, had to be appropriated to meet the needs of society, most efficiently and justly by a land value tax.     

Henry George and 'Rerum Novarum'

A bstract . Students of the life and thought of Henry George have accepted too readily his own opinion, expressed in the Open Letter that he addressed to Pope Leo XIII in 1891, that the Pope's epoch making encyclical Rerum novarum was aimed at Georgism The disposition of the Open Letter in Vatican circles remains obscure, perhaps because the Holy Office had so recently decided that George's works were deserving of condemnation. But there is documentary support for only an allusion to George's views on property in the encyclical. Nor can the reinstatement of Father Edward McGlynn and the reappraisal of George that it signaled be attributed to the Open Letter. George's views may have had significant indirect influence, however, through (1) national land reform movements insofar as they affected the course of Catholic social thought , and (2) the discussion of Georgism as a form of socialism. These possibilities need to be investigated.     

Henry George and Europe

A bstract . The basic ideas of Henry George , 19th century American economist and social philosopher, were not novel in Denmark , which had a tradition of land value taxation and free trade. But they had special appeal for its smallholder farmers. They demanded that George's principles be applied more fully, getting all tax revenues from the land 's unimproved value, so that taxes on buildings, personal property and wages could be abolished. Viggo Ullman 's Danish-Norwegian translation of Progress and Poverty won the commitment of folk school movement leaders and the intelligentsia. In 1903 large landowners gained control of the Liberal Party and proceeded to abolish the traditional land tax, producer of up to 50 percent of State revenues. The Radical Liberals split and took over, to some extent carrying out George's taxation principles. In 1919 a Georgist party, the "Retsforbundet" was founded; it won the balance of power in 1957. But lack of finances and organizing ability and growing voter apathy ended its progress.     

Henry George and the Shakers: Evolution of Communal Attitudes Towards Land Ownership

A bstract . The influence of Henry George on the Shakers has been misunderstood. The most prominent late nineteenth century Shaker elder was Frederick W. Evans , brother of George Henry Evans , the land reformer of the second quarter of the century. Similarities in the programs of G. H. Evans and Henry George have been recognized, but the two proposed different kinds of land reforms. Evans promoted quantitative restrictions on land ownership , while George was known for his advocacy of a single tax on land. The New York Shakers, as large land owners, successfully resisted early G. H. Evans type land reforms. Later, Shakers led by F. W. Evans embraced Henry George-type policy proposals and supported George for mayor of New York City. E. W. Evans himself, however, conflated Henry George's proposals with those of his brother, never realizing the contradiction between the two, much less resolving it. The consequences of Shaker ambivalence toward their large landholdings persisted well into the twentieth century.     

The Death of Henry George: Scholar or Statesman?

A bstract . Henry George was determined to complete his book on political economy (subsequently published as The Science of Political Economy ) but in March 1897 his health began to deteriorate. Ignoring doctors'warnings George continued to work on his project and in June of 1897, George, as if not having enough to do, accepted the nomination to run for Mayor of Greater New York. At the night of his acceptance of the nomination George was already thin of body; and his face was ashen. Five days before the election, on October 28, 1897, George succumbed to the inevitable and was buried on November 1, 1897. His passing provoked a hundred thousand citizens to pass before his bier, and in so doing the crowd vindicated George s lifelong idea of the brotherhood of man.     

Henry George's Challenge to the Economics Profession

A bstract . A session of the American Economic Association and the History of Economics Society commemorating the centennial of the publication of Progress and Poverty , while correctly assessing some of Henry George's writing as hyperbole, raised two important issues; George s legitimacy as an economist and his analysis's significance for economics. Our generation sins on the side of illogic too, but George's status has been questioned not only out of snobbishness but because he was perceived as unsafe; he raised "dangerous" fundamental issues. He questioned the terms of access to and use of land as channeled by real property and other rights and he asked whether the institution of landed property was anachronistically suited to the enjoyment and wealth of some as contrasted to all people.     

Henry George and Europe

A bstract . Adolf Damaschke , a Berlin schoolteacher, played a'fateful' role in developing a large land reform constituency in Wilhelmian Germany. By chance he heard a lecture by Michael Flürscheim , Henry George's follower. And by accident he was won to the movement. He built the Union of German Land Reformers into an active organization of 100,000 dedicated members from all classes. For tactical reasons what Damaschke pushed was his version of the' Single Tax Limited,' though he never lost sight of George's philosophy of freedom. There was a "German Fatherland" emphasis in his advocacy. Yet he despaired of building a mass constituency for that philosophy.     

Comments on Warren Samuels's "Why the Georgist Movement Has Not Succeeded"

A BSTRACT . The 16^th Amendment and the formation of the European Union were major political/economic reforms that should be seen as affirmations of the fundamental principles and teachings of Henry George. That these are not matters of interest to the self-defined Georgist movement reveals an excessively narrow focus of that movement and suggests its members' unfamiliarity with much of George's teachings.     

Echoes of Henry George in Modern Analysis

A bstract .   These comments were prepared in response to the session "Echoes of Henry George in Modern Analysis" presented at the 2002 meetings of the Southern Economic Association. Professor Holcombe prepared his comments at this journal's request at a later time.     

Henry George and Organized Labor:

A bstract . Henry George supported labor unions and was proud of his membership in the Printers' Union. But he did not regard them as the final solution of labor exploitation. He championed labor as one of the producing classes. His foray into politics as the candidate of organized labor's third party was characteristic; he had had much involvement in politics earlier. Although he supported labor's immediate demands, he sought mainly to use his candidacy to build a constituency for the single tax. Samuel Gompers , then head of the American Federation of Labor , at first worked for George's election but came to the belief that the unions alone should direct and control their political efforts. This view prevailed, though he and George remained good friends. But it is now a question whether Gompers' policy, at this time, serves labor's best interests.     

Henry George, Sun Yat-sen and China: More Than Land Policy Was Involved

A bstract . Sun Yat-sen repeatedly acknowledged the influence of Henry George , and this influence went beyond details of land policy. Significant parts of George's work involved his extensive references to China his diagnoses of China's ills, his vision of a possible better economic order , and his strong attack on the Malthusian theory. These too influenced Sun.     

Lessons of Enduring Value: Henry George a Century Later

A bstract . Henry George , in the judgment of Joseph Schumpeter, was an economist , self taught but, for his time, a century ago, well taught. George's writings can serve mankind constructively today. He wrote brilliantly in showing the destructiveness for human well-being of tariffs which obstruct international trade. His language shows clearly why such impediments to trade wastefully depress levels of living and opportunity. George foresaw some of the more sophisticated reasons why socialism could not be economically successful and also why it would threaten human freedom. Regarding the possibilities of reducing poverty , however, George has not been fully confirmed by a century's experience. But the reasoning that underlies his case for relying on land taxation for government revenue deserves serious attention today.     

Henry George and Europe:

A bstract Henry George's Progress and Poverty was translated into German and published in Germany in 1881, a little more than a year after its publication in America But it was not through George's own words that his ideas first became known there Germany already had land reformers , organized in small societies They made his teachings known However, unlike the case in Britain, Germany's leftists did not welcome George's land reform ideas True, Karl Marx recognized and wrote about the role the land question played in the exploitation of labor and in his third volume of Capital took basic positions parallel to George's, it was published long after Progress and Poverty The hostility of Wilhelm Ltebknecbt toward land reform reflected the German public's disinterest in the land question and may explain why Marx concentrated on appealing to the urban industrial worker     

Henry George in Australia

A bstract .   Some biographies of Henry George give brief accounts of his lecture tour of Australia in 1890, based mainly on his diary and on reports he sent back from Australia for publication in his New York newspaper, The Standard . This study supplements previous accounts with further details of the 48 lectures and 9 Sunday sermons he gave in 38 towns and cities during his 98-day stay in Australia, based on contemporary Australian newspaper reports. With an obvious proviso about the accuracy of the reporting, the Australian lectures are a valuable source of additional information on George's life and policies.