This thesis examines the impact of Social Credit in North America during the Great Depression as a social philosophy and approach to government. By placing Social Credit in the context of interwar social movements for monetary reform, the events in Alberta from 1932 to 1938 are examined from the historical geographic iteration of what I call the Keynesian frontier of monetary macro-economic thought. This thesis shifts attention on this episode of Canadian history towards the lens of monetary neutrality. I argue that the Keynesian frontier was the intellectual environment for a worldwide English- speaking progressive underground which sought to find in macro-economic theory a vision of utopian society where money had no effect on material choices and interpersonal relations. During the 1930s, movements such as Social Credit transformed this underground into a collective effort to integrate the institutional channels of circulation with the mechanics of the modern monetary and fiscal state.

This thesis examines the impact of Social Credit in North America during the Great Depression as a social philosophy and approach to government. By placing Social Credit in the context of interwar social movements for monetary reform, the events in Alberta from 1932 to 1938 are examined from the historical geographic iteration of what I call the Keynesian frontier of monetary macro-economic thought. This thesis shifts attention on this episode of Canadian history towards the lens of monetary neutrality. I argue that the Keynesian frontier was the intellectual environment for a worldwide English- speaking progressive underground which sought to find in macro-economic theory a vision of utopian society where money had no effect on material choices and interpersonal relations. During the 1930s, movements such as Social Credit transformed this underground into a collective effort to integrate the institutional channels of circulation with the mechanics of the modern monetary and fiscal state.

This thesis examines the impact of Social Credit in North America during the Great Depression as a social philosophy and approach to government. By placing Social Credit in the context of interwar social movements for monetary reform, the events in Alberta from 1932 to 1938 are examined from the historical geographic iteration of what I call the Keynesian frontier of monetary macro-economic thought. This thesis shifts attention on this episode of Canadian history towards the lens of monetary neutrality. I argue that the Keynesian frontier was the intellectual environment for a worldwide English- speaking progressive underground which sought to find in macro-economic theory a vision of utopian society where money had no effect on material choices and interpersonal relations. During the 1930s, movements such as Social Credit transformed this underground into a collective effort to integrate the institutional channels of circulation with the mechanics of the modern monetary and fiscal state.

L’ambition initiale de Rawls est de présenter une analyse de la justice distributive supérieure à la conception utilitariste, incapable, selon lui, de fournir une base satisfaisante de la justice dans le cadre d’une démocratie. Pour ce faire, Rawls mobilisera, dans son principal ouvrage Théorie de la Justice [1971], des idées empreintes de la philosophie politique et morale anglosaxonne mais également de très nombreux concepts forgés par les économistes. Cet ouvrage devient ainsi une référence incontournable pour la philosophie politique contemporaine mais aussi pour les théories économiques de la justice sociale. Notre thèse se propose de reconstruire la théorie de Rawls dont les études, nombreuses mais morcelées, ont donné lieu à des interprétations très contradictoires. Etudier la pensée de l’auteur à l’aune de l’économie sert à donner une cohérence d’ensemble à la justice comme équité, depuis sa genèse jusqu’à ses derniers développements. Cette méthodologie, en effet, nous permet de montrer qu’au-delà de l’indétermination du principe de différence – qui peut justifier tant une politique ultralibérale qu’une politique inspirée des idéaux socialistes – l’amélioration de la situation des plus défavorisés passe par le dépassement du système capitaliste. Ce système n’est pas à même de répondre aux exigences des principes de justice défendus par Rawls. / Rawls’ first ambition is to present an analysis of social justice superior to utilitarian conception, enable, according to him, to provide a satisfactory account of justice in the context of democracy. In order to do that, Rawls took, in his main book A Theory of Justice [1971], ideas imprinted of moral and political philosophy but also many concepts built by the economists. This work became consequently the reference to contemporary political philosophy and also to economic theory of social justice. Our thesis proposes to reconstruct the theory of Rawls. Indeed many but fragmented researches gave rise to conflicting interpretations of this theory. So studying Rawls’ thought regarding economics allows us tobring an overall consistency to the justice as fairness, from its genesis to its last developments. Our methodology aims to show, that beyond the indetermination of the Difference principle – which can either supply an ultraliberal policy or a policy inspired by socialist ideals – the improvement of the situation of the least advantaged required to go beyond capitalism. This system is enable to answer to the requirements of the principles of justice defended by Rawls.

L’objectif de cette thèse est d’analyser les conceptions de l’intervention publique des économistes libéraux français dans la deuxième moitié du XIXe siècle.Le premier chapitre expose leurs trois conceptions différentes de l’intervention publique. A partir de leurs analyses des attributions légitimes de l’Etat, nous proposons une typologie qui distingue une « orthodoxie » s’en tenant aux fonctions régaliennes, un libéralisme « régulateur », et un libéralisme plus « interventionniste ». Nous nous demandons si cette typologie reste pertinente quand ces économistes débattent de leurs problèmes pratiques de prédilection.Le second chapitre est ainsi consacré à l’analyse de la fiscalité par les économistes libéraux français. Cette analyse est en elle-même extrêmement riche, et nous mettons en avant, en particulier, les contributions formalisées de trois d’entre eux : Cournot, Dupuit et Fauveau.Nous étudions dans un troisième chapitre les positions de nos économistes libéraux sur l’émission, l’escompte et l’étalon monétaire. Nous montrons que leurs divergences théoriques s’expliquent par une préférence pour la règle ou pour l’intervention discrétionnaire.Le quatrième chapitre étudie la question des droits de propriété, en particulier de l’héritage et de la propriété intellectuelle. Nous faisons apparaître une opposition entre les partisans d’un Etat régulateur et ceux d’un Etat protecteur des droits naturels.Finalement, sur chacun des thèmes envisagés, il apparaît que la frontière entre « orthodoxie » et « hétérodoxie » libérales est moins figée qu’on ne pouvait le penser. / The object of this dissertation is to analyze the conceptions of public intervention in the French liberal School in the second half of the 19th century. The first chapter is devoted to the exposition of three different views of these economists on State. We elaborate a typology relying on their analyses of the legitimate State attributes; this typology distinguishes an “orthodoxy” considering the only provision of security and justice, a “regulatory” liberalism, and a more “interventionist” liberalism. We question this typology, wondering if it remains relevant when our liberal economists discuss the practical questions of their time.Thus the second chapter of our study presents to the liberal analyses of taxation. We highlight the richness of the French thought on this topic. We particularly put forward the formalized contributions of three of them: Cournot, Dupuit and Fauveau. In the third chapter we study the positions of our economists on the question of the issuing of banknotes, on credit, and on the metallic standard. We show that their theoretical divergences are well explained by their preference for a rule or for a discretionary public intervention.Our last chapter investigates the question of property rights. By examining their ideas on inheritance and on intellectual property, we emphasize the opposition inside this School between the advocates of a regulatory State and the defenders of the State as a protector of natural rights. Finally the boundary between the liberal “orthodoxy” and the liberal “heterodoxy” is less steady than what we could think.

O presente trabalho objetiva investigar as proximidades e afastamentos nas análises de Thorstein Bunde Veblen e de Karl Heinrich Marx acerca das relações de causalidade entre a estrutura e o sujeito. Para desenvolver essa questão, é abordada a concepção de indivíduo, de instituições e suas relações de causalidade na ótica de Veblen, as quais partem da crítica aos autores clássicos e neoclássicos. É exposta, ainda, a crítica que Veblen efetua a Marx por entendê-lo como determinista. Abordam-se, também, as origens da caricatura de Marx determinista em sua própria obra, a partir de seu arcabouço teórico, o materialismo histórico dialético. Nele o sujeito é condicionado pelas relações produtivas, em uma conjunção de propriedade privada e alienação. O rótulo de Marx tem também origem por seu intento de contradizer o idealismo e demonstrar a importância da história para se entender a realidade. A referida visão é desconstruída a partir das dispersas passagens em que Marx reconhece o indivíduo e sua influência sobre a estrutura. Por fim, são frisadas as zonas de aproximação e distanciamento entre as duas abordagens, assim como críticas a ambos. / This research aims at investigating the approximation and distances in the analysis of Thorstein Bunde Veblen and Karl Heinrich Marx about the causal relationships between structure and individual. To develop this issue, it is discussed the conception of individual, of institutions and their causal relationships from Veblen‘s perspective, which starts out from a critic to classical and neoclassical authors. It is also exposed the criticism that Veblen does to Marx by understanding that the last is deterministic. It is discoursed the sources of Marx‘s deterministic caricature in his own work, from its theoretical, the historical dialectical materialism. At this approach, the individual is conditioned by the productive relations, in a combination of private ownership and alienation. This label has also origin from Marx‘s attempts of contradicting the idealism and demonstrates the importance of history for understanding reality. That vision is deconstructed from scattered passages in which Marx recognizes the individual and their influence on the structure. Finally, the distance between the two approaches are beaded, as well as critical to both.

Assunto recorrente na literatura econômica, o desenvolvimentismo latino-americano passou a ocupar a agenda da pesquisa acadêmica a partir dos anos 1950, quando a sua gênese e o seu significado histórico como fenômeno econômico e político tornaram-se objeto de estudo de distintos cientistas sociais. Este trabalho parte da concepção de que, em suas origens, três foram as correntes as quais se amalgamaram para a sua formação: nacionalismo, industrialização e papelismo. Assim, embora haja relativo consenso de que, no Brasil, a política desenvolvimentista aparece de forma mais nítida após 1930 com o processo de substituição de importações, esta tese propõe-se a analisar a obra de três autores, típicos representantes de cada uma dessas vertentes, com o propósito de levantar evidências para robustecer a hipótese de que se trata de um fenômeno cuja origem remonta ao final do século XIX. Para tanto, destaca-se a originalidade do pensamento de Serzedello Correa, Amaro Cavalcanti e Rui Barbosa, autores os quais, em período de pleno domínio da ortodoxia econômica, procuraram não apenas afastar-se do paradigma tradicional, como também avaliar a pertinência de tais ideias ao que entendiam ser a realidade de um país exportador de produtos primários. Indo além, fizeram uma precoce e enfática defesa da intervenção estatal, da industrialização e da necessidade de “construção nacional”, motivo pelo qual podem ser considerados como precursores do desenvolvimentismo brasileiro que ganhou expressão ao longo do século XX. / A recurrent issue in economic’s literature, Latin-American developmentalism started to occupy the academic research agenda from the 1950’s on, when its genesis and its historical meaning as an economic and political phenomenon became the object of study of several social scientists. This work stems from the conception that, in its origins, there were three elements which amalgamated for its formation: nationalism, industrialization and papelism. This way, despite the consensus that, in Brazil, the developmentalist policies appear in a clearer way after 1930 with the importation substitution process, this thesis aims to analyze the oeuvre of three authors, typical representatives of these currents of thought, with the purpose of bringing out evidences to fortify a hypothesis related to a phenomenon whose origins remounts to the end of XIX century. In order to achieve this, it highlights the originality of Serzedello Correa, Amaro Cavalcanti and Rui Barbosa’s economic thoughts, which attempted not only to move away from the traditional paradigm, but also to adapt and validate the relevance of those ideas to what was deemed to be the country’s reality, marked as a primary products export economy. Moreover, they made a premature and emphatic defense of the industrialization and of the necessity of a “national breeding”, reasons why they can be considered one of the Brazilian and Latin-American developmentalist precursors that gained importance along the XX century.

O presente trabalho objetiva investigar as proximidades e afastamentos nas análises de Thorstein Bunde Veblen e de Karl Heinrich Marx acerca das relações de causalidade entre a estrutura e o sujeito. Para desenvolver essa questão, é abordada a concepção de indivíduo, de instituições e suas relações de causalidade na ótica de Veblen, as quais partem da crítica aos autores clássicos e neoclássicos. É exposta, ainda, a crítica que Veblen efetua a Marx por entendê-lo como determinista. Abordam-se, também, as origens da caricatura de Marx determinista em sua própria obra, a partir de seu arcabouço teórico, o materialismo histórico dialético. Nele o sujeito é condicionado pelas relações produtivas, em uma conjunção de propriedade privada e alienação. O rótulo de Marx tem também origem por seu intento de contradizer o idealismo e demonstrar a importância da história para se entender a realidade. A referida visão é desconstruída a partir das dispersas passagens em que Marx reconhece o indivíduo e sua influência sobre a estrutura. Por fim, são frisadas as zonas de aproximação e distanciamento entre as duas abordagens, assim como críticas a ambos. / This research aims at investigating the approximation and distances in the analysis of Thorstein Bunde Veblen and Karl Heinrich Marx about the causal relationships between structure and individual. To develop this issue, it is discussed the conception of individual, of institutions and their causal relationships from Veblen‘s perspective, which starts out from a critic to classical and neoclassical authors. It is also exposed the criticism that Veblen does to Marx by understanding that the last is deterministic. It is discoursed the sources of Marx‘s deterministic caricature in his own work, from its theoretical, the historical dialectical materialism. At this approach, the individual is conditioned by the productive relations, in a combination of private ownership and alienation. This label has also origin from Marx‘s attempts of contradicting the idealism and demonstrates the importance of history for understanding reality. That vision is deconstructed from scattered passages in which Marx recognizes the individual and their influence on the structure. Finally, the distance between the two approaches are beaded, as well as critical to both.

Assunto recorrente na literatura econômica, o desenvolvimentismo latino-americano passou a ocupar a agenda da pesquisa acadêmica a partir dos anos 1950, quando a sua gênese e o seu significado histórico como fenômeno econômico e político tornaram-se objeto de estudo de distintos cientistas sociais. Este trabalho parte da concepção de que, em suas origens, três foram as correntes as quais se amalgamaram para a sua formação: nacionalismo, industrialização e papelismo. Assim, embora haja relativo consenso de que, no Brasil, a política desenvolvimentista aparece de forma mais nítida após 1930 com o processo de substituição de importações, esta tese propõe-se a analisar a obra de três autores, típicos representantes de cada uma dessas vertentes, com o propósito de levantar evidências para robustecer a hipótese de que se trata de um fenômeno cuja origem remonta ao final do século XIX. Para tanto, destaca-se a originalidade do pensamento de Serzedello Correa, Amaro Cavalcanti e Rui Barbosa, autores os quais, em período de pleno domínio da ortodoxia econômica, procuraram não apenas afastar-se do paradigma tradicional, como também avaliar a pertinência de tais ideias ao que entendiam ser a realidade de um país exportador de produtos primários. Indo além, fizeram uma precoce e enfática defesa da intervenção estatal, da industrialização e da necessidade de “construção nacional”, motivo pelo qual podem ser considerados como precursores do desenvolvimentismo brasileiro que ganhou expressão ao longo do século XX. / A recurrent issue in economic’s literature, Latin-American developmentalism started to occupy the academic research agenda from the 1950’s on, when its genesis and its historical meaning as an economic and political phenomenon became the object of study of several social scientists. This work stems from the conception that, in its origins, there were three elements which amalgamated for its formation: nationalism, industrialization and papelism. This way, despite the consensus that, in Brazil, the developmentalist policies appear in a clearer way after 1930 with the importation substitution process, this thesis aims to analyze the oeuvre of three authors, typical representatives of these currents of thought, with the purpose of bringing out evidences to fortify a hypothesis related to a phenomenon whose origins remounts to the end of XIX century. In order to achieve this, it highlights the originality of Serzedello Correa, Amaro Cavalcanti and Rui Barbosa’s economic thoughts, which attempted not only to move away from the traditional paradigm, but also to adapt and validate the relevance of those ideas to what was deemed to be the country’s reality, marked as a primary products export economy. Moreover, they made a premature and emphatic defense of the industrialization and of the necessity of a “national breeding”, reasons why they can be considered one of the Brazilian and Latin-American developmentalist precursors that gained importance along the XX century.

O presente trabalho objetiva investigar as proximidades e afastamentos nas análises de Thorstein Bunde Veblen e de Karl Heinrich Marx acerca das relações de causalidade entre a estrutura e o sujeito. Para desenvolver essa questão, é abordada a concepção de indivíduo, de instituições e suas relações de causalidade na ótica de Veblen, as quais partem da crítica aos autores clássicos e neoclássicos. É exposta, ainda, a crítica que Veblen efetua a Marx por entendê-lo como determinista. Abordam-se, também, as origens da caricatura de Marx determinista em sua própria obra, a partir de seu arcabouço teórico, o materialismo histórico dialético. Nele o sujeito é condicionado pelas relações produtivas, em uma conjunção de propriedade privada e alienação. O rótulo de Marx tem também origem por seu intento de contradizer o idealismo e demonstrar a importância da história para se entender a realidade. A referida visão é desconstruída a partir das dispersas passagens em que Marx reconhece o indivíduo e sua influência sobre a estrutura. Por fim, são frisadas as zonas de aproximação e distanciamento entre as duas abordagens, assim como críticas a ambos. / This research aims at investigating the approximation and distances in the analysis of Thorstein Bunde Veblen and Karl Heinrich Marx about the causal relationships between structure and individual. To develop this issue, it is discussed the conception of individual, of institutions and their causal relationships from Veblen‘s perspective, which starts out from a critic to classical and neoclassical authors. It is also exposed the criticism that Veblen does to Marx by understanding that the last is deterministic. It is discoursed the sources of Marx‘s deterministic caricature in his own work, from its theoretical, the historical dialectical materialism. At this approach, the individual is conditioned by the productive relations, in a combination of private ownership and alienation. This label has also origin from Marx‘s attempts of contradicting the idealism and demonstrates the importance of history for understanding reality. That vision is deconstructed from scattered passages in which Marx recognizes the individual and their influence on the structure. Finally, the distance between the two approaches are beaded, as well as critical to both.