Between commerce and empire: David Hume, colonial slavery, and commercial incivility

Eighteenth-century Enlightenment thought has recently been reclaimed as arobust, albeit short-lived, cosmopolitan critique of European imperialism. Thisessay complicates this interpretation through a study of David Hume’s reflectionson commerce, empire, and slavery. I argue that while Hume condemned...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: INCE, Onur Ulas
Format: text
Language:English
Published: Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University 2018
Subjects:
Online Access:https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soss_research_all/9
https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1008&context=soss_research_all
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Singapore Management University
Language: English
id sg-smu-ink.soss_research_all-1008
record_format dspace
spelling sg-smu-ink.soss_research_all-10082018-04-06T00:53:16Z Between commerce and empire: David Hume, colonial slavery, and commercial incivility INCE, Onur Ulas Eighteenth-century Enlightenment thought has recently been reclaimed as arobust, albeit short-lived, cosmopolitan critique of European imperialism. Thisessay complicates this interpretation through a study of David Hume’s reflectionson commerce, empire, and slavery. I argue that while Hume condemned thecolonial system of monopoly, war, and conquest, his strictures against empiredid not extend to colonial slavery in the Atlantic. This was because colonialslavery represented a manifestly uncivilinstitution when judged by enlightened metropolitan sensibilities, yet also adecisively commercial institutionpivotal to the eighteenth-century global economy. Confronted by the paradoxical“commercial incivility” of modern slavery, Hume opted for disavowing the linkbetween slavery and commerce, and confined his criticism of slavery to itsancient, feudal, and Asiatic incarnations. I contend that Hume’s disavowal ofthe commercial barbarism of the Atlantic economy is part of a broaderideological effort to separate the idea of commerce from its imperial originsand posit it as the liberal antithesis of empire. The implications of analysis,I conclude, go beyond the eighteenth-century debates over commerce and empire,and more generally pertain to the contradictory entwinement of liberalism andcapitalism. 2018-03-01T08:00:00Z text application/pdf https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soss_research_all/9 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1008&context=soss_research_all http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Research Collection School of Social Sciences eng Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University Liberalism empire capitalism colonialism slavery commerce Enlightenment David Hume Adam Smith Political Economy Political Science
institution Singapore Management University
building SMU Libraries
continent Asia
country Singapore
Singapore
content_provider SMU Libraries
collection InK@SMU
language English
topic Liberalism
empire
capitalism
colonialism
slavery
commerce
Enlightenment
David Hume
Adam Smith
Political Economy
Political Science
spellingShingle Liberalism
empire
capitalism
colonialism
slavery
commerce
Enlightenment
David Hume
Adam Smith
Political Economy
Political Science
INCE, Onur Ulas
Between commerce and empire: David Hume, colonial slavery, and commercial incivility
description Eighteenth-century Enlightenment thought has recently been reclaimed as arobust, albeit short-lived, cosmopolitan critique of European imperialism. Thisessay complicates this interpretation through a study of David Hume’s reflectionson commerce, empire, and slavery. I argue that while Hume condemned thecolonial system of monopoly, war, and conquest, his strictures against empiredid not extend to colonial slavery in the Atlantic. This was because colonialslavery represented a manifestly uncivilinstitution when judged by enlightened metropolitan sensibilities, yet also adecisively commercial institutionpivotal to the eighteenth-century global economy. Confronted by the paradoxical“commercial incivility” of modern slavery, Hume opted for disavowing the linkbetween slavery and commerce, and confined his criticism of slavery to itsancient, feudal, and Asiatic incarnations. I contend that Hume’s disavowal ofthe commercial barbarism of the Atlantic economy is part of a broaderideological effort to separate the idea of commerce from its imperial originsand posit it as the liberal antithesis of empire. The implications of analysis,I conclude, go beyond the eighteenth-century debates over commerce and empire,and more generally pertain to the contradictory entwinement of liberalism andcapitalism.
format text
author INCE, Onur Ulas
author_facet INCE, Onur Ulas
author_sort INCE, Onur Ulas
title Between commerce and empire: David Hume, colonial slavery, and commercial incivility
title_short Between commerce and empire: David Hume, colonial slavery, and commercial incivility
title_full Between commerce and empire: David Hume, colonial slavery, and commercial incivility
title_fullStr Between commerce and empire: David Hume, colonial slavery, and commercial incivility
title_full_unstemmed Between commerce and empire: David Hume, colonial slavery, and commercial incivility
title_sort between commerce and empire: david hume, colonial slavery, and commercial incivility
publisher Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
publishDate 2018
url https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soss_research_all/9
https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1008&context=soss_research_all
_version_ 1712300908849659904