A Life of Utility: Rousseau's Non-expansive Commercial Society

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

The economic freedom of working, consuming, and investing is taken as an essential human right inmodern capitalist society. However, the development of commercial society also leads to an increase ininequality, environmental pollution, and a greater risk of economic crisis. Does commerce necessarilybring corruption and inequality? What role does commerce play in politics? What are the dangers, as wellas the appeals of developing a robust commercial society? My proposed research seeks to answer thesequestions by looking at the political philosophy of Jean-Jac Rousseau, who is regarded as the "first andgreatest critics" of commercial society (Rasmussen, 2008).My research has two aims: to contribute to a neglected field of Rousseau studies by revealing thesophistication of Rousseau's critique of commerce and to better understand the role of commerce inmodern politics. To achieve them, my research challenges the traditional reading which takes Rousseauas a utopian advocate of economic autarchy against commercial society (Shklar, 1978; Starobinski,1979;Fridén,1998). I argue that Rousseau's attitude towards commerce is more complicated than anunequivocal rejection. On the one hand, Rousseau criticizes commerce for corrupting society byincreasing inequality and deepening interpersonal dependence. On the other hand, Rousseau viewscommerce as a necessary and unavoidable practice in modern society. Rousseau regards the maininstitutions and practices of commerce as indispensable parts of modern society, such as privateproperty rights, division of labor, and exchanges. What Rousseau mainly opposes is an expansive versionof commercial society based on the pursuit of relative wealth and unnecessary needs. To avoid thecorruption of commercial society, Rousseau takes utility, instead of profit, as the guiding principle inpeople's economic life to restrain the growth of unnecessary needs. Following that, instead of viewingRousseau and Adam Smith as intellectual opponents, I argue that they share similar views on themechanism of commercial society as well as its weaknesses. Where they differ is the evaluation ofeconomic growth, which according to Rousseau is always accompanied by a political cost of inequality.Moreover, due to Rousseau's double-sided understanding of commerce, his economic thought provides agood basis to research the role of commerce in modern politics. Through the prism of Rousseau's politicaleconomy, one can better understand the advantages and disadvantages of material progress in modernsociety.