Scholars have noticed that Edmund Burke's impassioned economic tract in favor of market liberty, Thoughts and Details on Scarcity, appears to be at odds with his political philosophy and rhetorical temperament of prudence and restraint. This essay challenges this interpretation. I contend that Burke's emotional statements in the writing reflect strong continuities with his earlier reflections and political activities regarding economic issues. From his earliest days in Parliament to his final years, Burke was a firm supporter of commercial liberty, both domestic and foreign. I conclude by arguing that we cannot properly understand Burke's belief in gradual reform unless we grasp his idea of incremental commercial improvement.
It is often claimed that Adam Smith and Edmund Burke held similar views on matters relating to political economy. One area of tension in their thought, however, was the institutional credibility of Britain’s East India Company. They both argued that the Company corrupted market order in India, but while Smith supported the termination of the firm’s charter, Burke aspired to preserve it. This article examines why they arrived at such divergent conclusions. It argues that the source of Burke and Smith’s friction arose from the dissimilar frames of reference through which they assessed the credibility of the Company. Burke examined the corporation’s legitimacy through the lens of British prescriptive, imperial, and constitutional history, yet Smith evaluated it as part of his larger attack on the mercantile system. These different frames of reference were responsible for the further incongruities in their thought on the Company relating to the role of prescription and imperial honor in political communities, the qualifications of traders to rule, and the appropriate tempo of policy reform. This article concludes that, even with such differences, the two thinkers’ respective criticisms of the Company illustrate the threat that monopolies pose to the liberal order.
State education systems to support leadership development have received relatively scant attention and resources, despite the demonstrated importance of leadership to school improvement. This need spurred the National Association of State Boards of Education (NASBE) to form a study group with its members and partner with the Consortium for Policy Research in Education (CPRE) to examine the problem from a state policy perspective; to offer a framework, guidance, and resources to help states develop and keep effective leaders; provide examples of practices for states; and share insights from partner organizations. The report, Successful Leaders for Successful Schools: Building and Maintaining a Quality Workforce, details findings that emerged from this work. As a companion piece to this work, State Leadership Development Policies-An Analysis of 50 States and Territories, presents a comprehensive picture of school leadership development policies across all 50 states and US territories. CPRE Researchers Bobbi Newman, Jonathan Supovitz, and Greg Collins, in collaboration with NASBE's Robert Hull and Stephen Prociw, produced an interactive report that seeks to operationalize the framework developed for state education agencies to improve the school leadership pipeline. Researchers interviewed state board members and staff members from state education agencies to learn about their states' school leadership development policies and practices. Data collection questions focused on identifying the organizational and individual supports that states have established. State Leadership Development Policies-An Analysis of 50 States and Territories provides a wealth of information for state leaders interested in learning about a sample of each state's policies and programs that support the school leadership pipeline.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.