![Sample our Social Sciences journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110822/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Social-Sciences.jpg"})
Abstract
Malthusian pessimism was singled out as the most vulnerable expression of the dominant, classical school of economics. Boston idealists, who saw the Malthusian concept as ‘a curb to all reform’, searched for a rebuttal in the study of institutional economics.
The Pennsylvania protectionists, centred about Henry C. Carey, attacked the Malthusian concept as a barrier to the proposed ‘American system’ which was designed to increase population densities by promoting industrial growth.
The fusion of these two schools of thought with the Free Soil elements in the Republican party brought about what many at the time considered a decisive defeat of the Malthusian philosophy in America.
Clearly this was not so, for Malthus was never more popular than in post-Civil War America. Why this was so is the subject of this paper. There are various possibilities: The growing influence of Spencer, Mill and Darwin was certainly a factor, and four years of civil bloodshed appear to have reconciled many to the tragic view of life found in the Malthusian concept. Also, the wagefund doctrine was widely accepted during this period of industrial growth.
Whatever the reasons, Malthus again proved his curious vitality after being buried by his enemies.