attacking economic man

Here's one example of the attacks on classical economics along the lines of difference.  In an 1866 article entitled "Race in Legislation and Political Economy", James Hunt, the owner of the Anthropological Review, wrote this about J. S. Mill:

Mr. Mill, who will not admit that the Australian, the Andaman islander, and the Hottentot labour under any inherent incapacity for attaining the highest culture of ancient Greece or modern Europe! (1866, p. 122).

Not surprising, the debate focused in large measure on the capacity to make economic and political choices (to save, to have a family, to educate oneself and one's family, to vote).

Comments

[Marcin]

My question is why this kind of thinking is still widespread. There was a lot of talk prior to Iraq and Afghanistan that Middle Easterners can't adopt democracy. There is also a "soft" racism in people declaring that blacks need the government, and that they can't get themselves out of poverty.

[Ryan Peterson]

Marcin,

It's odder than that. At one time, people who thought there were inherent differences were considered racists. It seems to me that now it's often the people who think that Middle Easterners *can* develop democracy who are considered racists and imperialists.