The quest for a prime mover: a critique of Deirdre McCloskey's theory of change

Within a framework of history of political thought, this essay examines the original, albeit questionable, account furthered by Chicago economist Deirdre McCloskey. First, I will present an intellectual profile of the author in order to provide a broader perspective on her thoughts about ethics, politics and economics, and to show how her position in these areas intertwines with the main thesis expressed in the Bourgeois trilogy. Secondly, I will propose, on the basis of an alternative reading of historical materialism, that Marx’s theory of change is more complex than she admits. Finally, I will show the problematic aspects of McCloskey’s theory of historical change. My main point is that McCloskey’s account is motivated by her polemic intent against Marxism –as her intellectual background shows –and because of that she ignores alternative readings of historical materialism. As a consequence, her theory of historical change presents a few flaws. In fact, the “revolution of ideas” which McCloskey indicates as a direct cause of the Industrial Revolution, may appear as an attempt to replace the accumulation theory of the Marxist tradition with another all-purpose label. It is risky to rely on a theory that seeks a single cause for historical change, because it entails a linear conception of history rather than a more complex and comprehensive one. In short, I maintain that strict causal monism cannot explain the evolution of society

Homo Laborans. Tra Hannah Arendt e Simone Weil

Hannah Arendt and Simone Weil, who had in common both a Jewish origin and the experience of the exile, were able to cast a light on the darkness of the 20th century with their words and actions. They lived two parallel lives – even though Simone's came to an end when she was 34 years old. The aim of this essay is to retrace their arguments on themes they both dealt with: it is interesting to note how sometimes they complete each other, while other times they provide different perspectives on the challenging tasks that the events in Europe gave to political thought in the 20th century. This essay specifically deals with similarities and differences in their ways of conceiving labour, with a particular emphasis on the labouring class – the "homo laborans", in Arendt's words – and their theories on industrial work. To conclude, I will put forward some reflections on Arendt and Weil's relationship with the Marxist tradition, in an attempt to consider their criticism and their disagreements with Karl Marx's theories