The Carey Project Launch – Partnered With American Affairs and American Compass
Adam Smith. Karl Marx. Two economists that tower above all. The former represents capitalism and the latter socialism. Their writings are continuously poured over and examined. One cannot talk about mainstream economics without being derivative of these avatars. However, their schools of thought are not alone. Protectionism — an economic school of thought aimed at developing and protecting a nation’s industry through public and private sector collaboration for popularly distributed benefits — stands in contrast to each.
A survey of history reveals that it was responsible for much of the major growth periods of advanced countries. Both capitalism and socialism have overshadowed protectionism but seem more and more lackluster in their ability to generate productive results. At the dawn of a new multipolar world order, of increased competition among nations, protectionism is being rediscovered by economists and policymakers but who are its avatars?
Protectionism has had comparatively less scholarship outlining its tenets and promoting its top articulators. Those who utilized protectionism were more focused on realist statecraft than academia. As Krzysztof Tyszka-Drozdowski highlighted, “Historian Pierre Deyon argues that [protectionism] never crystallized into a rigid doctrine, ‘with its own Bible, its Church and its prophets.’”
I hope to change that. I’m announcing my new book project to uncover the hidden history of protectionism and its most essential advocates. I have partnered with American Affairs and American Compass through their Common Good Economics Grant Program to accomplish this goal. They are both providing excellent articulations of protectionism and I’m proud to be awarded by them.
I will write on the lives and works of the Irish-American father-son duo Mathew and Henry C. Carey. As protectionist economists, they had a tremendous impact and reach. Their lives span from 1760 to 1879. Geographically, they lived and were concerned most with the United States of America. Mathew became a prominent publisher often corresponding with America’s founding fathers. Henry was suggested to be President Abraham Lincoln’s most respected economic advisor. Their impact also transcended American borders. Major economists of their time like socialist Karl Marx and capitalist John Stuart Mill commented on the Careys. The writings of the Careys were found to have influenced economic policy from Germany to Japan in the 19th to 20th centuries as well.
But one other country stood out. The country they came from. Ireland. Mathew was born in Ireland, participated in revolutionary activity in Ireland, and fostered Irish networks while in America. Henry, while born in America, maintained an interest in Ireland and was acculturated in his father’s Irish worldview. Protectionism as we know it today was greatly molded by the Careys and they did so as a reaction to Ireland’s relationship with English imperialism. Much of this relationship was projected onto their second home of America and their Anglophobia was directed at preventing America from suffering the same fate as Ireland.
The discipline of mainstream economics is rooted in England and its imperialist model. Ireland, as the first colony of England, represents a window to critique assumptions of mainstream economics. Irish observers were some of the first to argue that English-derived economics were deliberate methods of keeping colonies down for the benefit of England’s imperial core. Much of mainstream economics has uncritically absorbed such imperial ideas and presented them as neutral. Only by understanding the history of this relationship can we unravel the full context of protectionism and crystalize its insights in general.
The Careys’ protectionism was developmental, populist, nationalist, and anti-imperialist. By developmental, the Careys wanted America to industrialize and advance its economy above just resource extraction. By populist, the Careys were very critical of elites and promoted policy that distributed economic benefits to the widest amount of people. By nationalist, the Careys were very concerned with foreign dependence and wanted America to be self-reliant. By anti-imperialist, the Careys were opponents of immorally subjugating other peoples and lands whether it was done by England or, later, America.
The Careys were very influential and had unique ideas. This project hopes to answer a variety of questions. Why were the Careys forgotten? What were their ideas? Were they correct or incorrect? How do they complicate the dominant schools of thought of capitalism and socialism? How did their lives shape their ideas? How geographically spread and long lasting were their ideas? What insights we can draw from them for our present-day challenges?
Within the small sphere of literature on protectionism, two other names often come up as candidates for avatars. Alexander Hamilton was an American founding father and Secretary of the Treasury from 1789 to 1795. Friedrich List was a German economist that wrote The National System of Political Economy in 1841. These men were no doubt very influential, but should they be more centered than the Careys?
First, the Careys individually and collectively wrote much more on economics than Hamilton or List. The Careys family trade was publishing and throughout all their lives they wrote extensively on economics, whereas the works of Hamilton and List are comparatively concise. For example, List’s major work is about 400 pages while Henry C. Carey’s major work spanned three volumes totaling 1,500 pages.
Second, Hamilton and List were inspired by the Careys. Hamilton's Report on the Subject of Manufactures in 1791, which is taken to be his most significant contribution to protectionism, was most likely imitative of Mathew’s prior works found in his newspaper widely read by the founding fathers. In fact, Hamilton’s assistant Tench Coxe, who was suggested to have written the first draft of Hamilton’s report, was a frequent collaborator with Mathew and published by him. In later years, Mathew leveraged Hamilton’s famous name to market the same economic ideas he once promoted in Ireland in the 1780s.
Similarly, List traveled to America in 1825 and settled in Philadelphia coincidentally the same city as the Careys. List was saturated in the intellectual network dominated by the Careys. In the first pages of his other major book in 1827, Outlines of American Political Economy, he explicitly cited the Philadelphia Society for the Promotion of National Industry as a major influence. This proto-think-tank was founded by Mathew in 1819 and he served as a major contributor to it. Henry became more of a contemporary of List but was never influenced by List and maintained a clear original line of scholarship continued from his father.
Third, Hamilton and List had gaps or were incorrect in certain aspects that would be incongruent with present-day notions of protectionism. Hamilton didn’t favor a tariff which is one of the bedrock policies of protectionism which the Careys supported. Hamilton favored foreign debt to stimulate economic growth which the Careys saw as a slippery slope to subjugation. Hamilton favored an economic policy that benefited elites while the Careys sought to distribute economic policy to the masses.
List also had little to say on money and banking of which the Careys had ample analysis. In our time, money and banking are so important to reform and the Careys have many insights on those topics. A significant amount of this project will be concerned with revealing their contributions on financial crises, money, private banking, and central banking. Finally, the Careys disagreed with List’s conclusion that free trade would eventually be preferred and that protectionism was a temporary policy. They also disagreed with List’s inclinations towards imperialism and geographic determinism.
Perhaps most unique about the Careys was their piercing moral argument at the heart of their works. They were greatly concerned about economic inequality and how it created “barbarism.” Their crusade was ultimately not to increase numbers on a chart but to advance the moral character of society. Henry wrote on his opposition to slavery in all its forms, desire for female equality, and environmental advocacy that make him a man apart from his own time. It is here we might find the most relatable reason to recover the Careys in our time.
The scholarship that examines the Careys is rather limited and neglected although major writers have made commendable contributions. The most recent work to significantly research the Careys was Eric Helleiner’s 2021 The Neomercantilists. He focused on Henry and shed great light on his ideas and influence. Although, it was a section of much larger general book on protectionist thought. It was not a full exploration of the Careys. Helleiner agreed that more work should be done to expand on the Careys. You can watch a podcast I did with Helleiner where we discuss his book here.
Cathy Matson, Stephen Meardon, Sofia Valeonti, and David A. Cowan are all significant modern scholars that have uncovered pieces of the Careys as well. Older scholars include Edward C. Carter II, Arnold W. Green, A.D.H. Kaplan, Earl L. Bradsher, Charles H. Levermore, and William Elder. The works of theirs’ and others are indispensable in stitching together the full story of the Careys. These secondary sources will add necessary insight, but the main task of this project will be to review the immense catalogue of primary source materials authored by the Careys. Extensive review of their notable publications, periodical essays, and private letters will be used to uncover their lives and work. Most archival research will be conducted in Philadelphia.
Furthermore, background research will be conducted on the wider history that the Careys existed within. Some of these more general scholars include Joseph Schumpeter on history of global economic thought, Bray Hammond on American banking, Andrew Shankman on the founding fathers, and R.D. Collison Black on Irish economic thought. Special focus will be placed on America’s and Ireland’s political machinations, commercial growth, and economic trends. Where possible, data analysis will be done to better validate or invalidate arguments made by the Careys or other prominent subjects.
This project is essential because there is no work that combines all these fields and partial examinations into a comprehensive and complete explanation of the Careys. It is necessary to write on both the father and son rather than separately because their ideas are so interrelated. It is necessary to focus on their biographies because it informs their ideas and the contexts they acted in. It is necessary to expand to a global history methodology because we must evaluate the significance of inspirations on the Careys and to what degree the Careys influenced global economic thought both academically and practically.
This project will be open-sourced. I will publish research as I go. Both written and multimedia content will be provided. Experts will be invited to discuss their research in podcast format too. You will be able to find all this content on my Substack. The final product will be a revised and edited book that draws on the prior content but may not replicate the initial findings.
I’m distinctively suited to write this book. I have a B.A. in economics from New York University. I was the lead researcher for CoinDesk where I gained a close understanding of global finance, monetary policy, and money. I have an M.A. in global history from University College Dublin where my thesis focused on protectionism and its relationship between America and Ireland. Finally, my most recent publications have explained various economic concepts and histories with an emphasis on protectionism. Taken together, these attributes — economic knowledge, data analysis skills, sectoral insight, and historical awareness — uniquely qualify me to conduct this project. Perhaps more so than any other, my Irish connection enables me to shed light on the Careys’ Irish perspective and open up a new understanding of them, American history, and global economic thought.
Protectionism is most needed in a global environment of increased competition among nations. For most of the past 70 years, the world has been under the unipolar hegemony of America. Now, that order is breaking down into a multipolar order of rival nations. China is the most prominent rival to America but not alone. Whether the citizen of America or any other nation, the world is increasing in competition and the need to apply realist policy solutions is apparent. The free lunch of unipolarity is gone. In this environment, protectionism is needed more than ever. Those who cling to mainstream economics, or what may best be labeled neoliberalism, will double down on their misapplied theories and criticize alternatives. This book’s ambition is to offer rebuttal to those neoliberal critiques and finally provide protectionism with robust avatars and doctrines.