Was Richard Cantillon a Mercantilist?
by Mark Thornton (Mises Institute)
In contrast to the widely held perspective that Cantillon was a mercantilist, evidence is presented that indicates that such a categorization is not scientifically valid. He was not a mercantilist. He generally did not advocate or endorse mercantilist economic policies and was sharply critical of the mercantilist policies that he did write about. When he wrote about the work of English mercantilists such as William Petty, Charles Davanant, and John Locke, he was sharply critical and even ridiculed their methods and views. Even when Cantillon seemed to agree with mercantilist objectives in such areas as international trade and money, there is sharp divergence in analysis and rationale between Cantillon and his self-described opponents—the English mercantilists. Finally, in each case where Cantillon appears to endorse mercantilist or interventionist policies such as a “flourishing” navy, a positive balance of trade, gold inflows, job training, rural economic development, and especially “regulating” trade, it is not clear—when his statements are placed in the proper textual and historical context—that Cantillon was calling for increased government action. In fact, in all cases there is at least some indication that he may have been calling for less government involvement, rather than more.
Comments on this entry are closed.