Culture & Society

In new research, Nandini Gupta and Swarnodeep Homroy show that firms in the United States are choosing politically-aligned suppliers to insure their supply chains against disruption. Aligned relationships are markedly more resilient when shocks hit, but the insurance is paid for in higher input costs and less innovation.

Jolted by the Great Depression of the 1930s, Thurman Arnold devised an anti-monopoly industrial policy for the United States Justice Department that breathed fresh life into a then-moribund Sherman Anti-Trust Act. Arnold’s jurisprudence built on Adam Smith’s discovery that market-making could promote national security and forestall civil unrest. Smith’s insights had informed the industrial policy of Alexander Hamilton, who laid the groundwork in the 1790s for the country’s economic development. Edward H. Levi brought Arnold’s pragmatic anti-monopolism to the University of Chicago. Here, ironically, Arnoldian jurisprudence would be transmogrified into the doctrinaire company-over-country market fundamentalism of the Chicago School of Economics. Today, writes Richard R. John, as we envision for the 21st century a new pro-market, pro-freedom, pro-national security industrial policy, it is worth recalling how U. S. economic development took the form that it did, why the Chicago School repudiated the enduring wisdom of Adam Smith, and what this portends for the world of today.

Adam Smith’s theory of political economy did not begin with the isolated individual but rather the individual who operates to earn the respect of others. Wealth and freedom grew from these relationships and engaging with others to create a free society, or what 20th century philosopher Isaiah Berlin’s would call positive freedom. In the 1970s and ‘80s, the Chicago School abandoned this aspect of freedom in preference of the isolated individual, which in turn produced a weaker concept of freedom, morality, and society that has stifled the cultivation of all three in the United States, writes Maha Rafi Atal.

The connections between Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations and Theory of Moral Sentiments reveal a much more complicated understanding of how markets work than developed in the common interpretation by the Chicago School of economics or that of its critics. Smith’s political economy based on commerce, sympathy, and competition produced social good but only when complemented and checked by other forces. When not checked, Smith worried about “factions” that produce bad outcomes, write Sandra J. Peart and David M. Levy.

The post-World War II Chicago School of Aaron Director and Milton Friedman reimagined a new (neo) liberalism that treated economic liberties and the free market as the greatest defense of political rights. The government, and democracy, were more often than not barriers to economic liberties. The United States continues to suffer from neoliberalism’s prescriptions, and addressing the concerns of today’s populist movements will mean rediscovering ideas of freedom that the Chicago School denigrated, writes Robert Van Horn.

The Chicago School is often associated with laissez-faire economics that reads into Adam Smith’s philosophy of political economy justifications for self-interest and prudential motivations. However, a careful history of the University of Chicago’s early Economics Department and School of Commerce and Administration reveals a more complicated understanding of how economics and business were to interact with one another and society. The early University of Chicago pursued a program that emphasized that laissez-faire economics and a concern for the public interest were not antagonists but perfectly compatible, writes David Mitch.

Adam Smith and the Founding Fathers envisioned a society in which economic and political freedom, grouped together in the ideology of liberalism, would produce a wealthy, free, and peaceful society. Centuries later, this vision has come to fruition, and F. A. Hayek and Milton Friedman helped elaborate and advance that vision in their economic and philosophical works. The lesson for today’s populist moment is not to abandon these principles, but to continue to pursue them, as it is their imperfect realization, not their imperfect conceptualization, that burdens today’s society, writes Peter Boettke.

Sarah Kreps argues that elected officials should be cautious of immediately rejecting proposals for local data centers. Instead, officials should capture potential benefits and protect residents by negotiating for better terms.

In new research, Markus Eberhardt, Giovanni Facchini, and Valeria Rueda find that a growing share of PhD graduates from top U.S. economics programs are leaving academia, looking beyond North America, and moving into the private sector, especially towards the tech industry.

In new research, Yulia Chikish, Gregory J. Colman, Dhaval M. Dave, Brad R. Humphreys, Zachary Santamaria, and Zachary Winship find that New York City congestion pricing has reduced emergency medical services response times.