Patterns of intention: Oberkampf and Knoll as Schumpeterian entrepreneurs

ABSTRACT

Presented here is an analysis of Schumpeter’s interest in political economy, as it relates to his use of history to investigate economic change and capitalism. This aspect of Schumpeter’s work – referring to style and involving a range of moral and aesthetic considerations – is largely neglected in entrepreneurship studies despite his influence on the discipline. This paper argues these considerations are essential to understand Schumpeter’s entrepreneur and the role of creative destruction in rejuvenating capitalism. However, his theory also involves political inclinations and choices, such as elitism and a fear of declinism, both of which are more typical to conservative not destructive worldviews. To illustrate my argument I examine and describe two cases, those of Oberkampf and Knoll, the latter a rough contemporary of Schumpeter. The findings point to the central role of political economy in past and present debates about the political role of entrepreneurship in society, suggesting a need for further attention to the zeitgeist (spirit of the time) in future research.

KEYWORDS:

• Entrepreneur
• political economy
• aesthetics
• Schumpeter

Acknowledgments

The author of the paper is very grateful to the four Editors of the Special Issue, Carine Farias, Pablo Fernandez, Robin Holt and Daniel Hjorth. She especially thanks Robin Holt for the cleverness of his reading and also for his genuine kindness which balances the sharpness of his analysis. She also thanks her colleagues, Christian Barrère, Jean-Sébastien Gharbi, Cyril Hédoin and Martino Nieddu for their advice on the history of economic thought.)

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1. As we have seen, Schumpeter did not believe women could or should play that role.

2. ««««Whoever knows the life history of Arkwright, will never dub this barber-genius noble. Of all the great inventors of the 18th century, he was incontestably the greatest thiever of other people’s inventions and the meanest fellow.»«« (Marx, 1887):, 370, n 107).