"Dismal Science" Label Rooted in 1849 Anti-Slavery Stance of Economists

Phil Magness, a prominent economic historian and Senior Research Fellow at the American Institute for Economic Research, recently clarified the historical origin of the term "dismal science" often used to describe economics. In a social media post, Magness asserted that the pejorative label, coined in 1849, was directed at economists due to their strong advocacy for the abolition of slavery. He urged for greater historical accuracy when using such terms in public discourse.

The term was introduced by Scottish essayist Thomas Carlyle in his 1849 essay, "Occasional Discourse on The Nigger Question." Contrary to a common misconception that links the term to Thomas Malthus's population theories, Carlyle's criticism stemmed from the economic principles that asserted human equality and thus supported the emancipation of enslaved people. Carlyle, who held racist views, reportedly described Black individuals as "two-legged cattle" and lamented the economic consequences of abolition in the British West Indies.

Historical research indicates that 19th-century economists, including figures like John Stuart Mill, actively allied with the British anti-slavery movement. This alliance was notably centered around "Exeter Hall" in London, a hub for evangelical and abolitionist activities. The economists' support for abolitionism was rooted in their belief that all humans possessed the same fundamental rights, a principle that directly challenged the institution of slavery.

This historical opposition to slavery by free-market proponents was also evident in the United States. George Fitzhugh, a leading pro-slavery theorist in the antebellum South and an admirer of Carlyle, explicitly attacked free-market economics. In his 1854 work, Sociology for the South, Fitzhugh declared:

"Political economy is the science of free society. Its fundamental maxim Laissez-faire and 'Pas trop gouverner,' are at war with all kinds of slavery." He viewed capitalism as an existential threat to the slave system.

Magness's recent commentary underscores the importance of understanding the true historical context behind widely used phrases. His work, and that of other historians, challenges contemporary narratives that sometimes attempt to link capitalism inextricably with slavery, by highlighting the strong anti-slavery stance of classical liberal economists and the anti-capitalist views of prominent pro-slavery advocates. The tweet serves as a reminder to delve into the origins of historical terms before their casual use.