Jump to content

Talk:Henry George: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Henry George/Archive 1) (bot
 
(44 intermediate revisions by 27 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{Talk header}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|vital=yes|blp=no|listas=George, Henry|1=
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{WikiProject Pennsylvania|class=B|auto=inherit|importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Biography|s&a-work-group=yes}}
⚫
{{WikiProject Pennsylvania|importance=high}}
{{WP1.0|v0.7=pass|class=B|category=Socsci}}
{{WikiProject Biography
{{WikiProject Philosophy|importance=low|social=yes|philosopher=yes}}
⚫
{{WikiProject Economics|importance=high}}
|living=no
{{WikiProject Politics|libertarianism=yes|libertarianism-importance=mid}}
|class=B
⚫
{{WikiProject Philadelphia|auto=inherit|importance=high}}
|s&a-work-group=yes
{{WikiProject Journalism}}
|listas=George, Henry
}}
}}
⚫
{{clear}}
{{WikiProject Philosophy|class=b|importance=low|social=yes|philosopher=yes}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
⚫
{{WikiProject Economics|class=B|importance=high}}
| algo = old(365d)
⚫
{{WikiProject Libertarianism|class=B|importance=low}}
| archive = Talk:Henry George/Archive %(counter)d
⚫
{{WikiProject Philadelphia|class=B|auto=inherit|importance=high}}
| counter = 1
| maxarchivesize = 150K
| archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}}
| minthreadstoarchive = 1
| minthreadsleft = 2
}}
}}
{{archives|search=yes}}
⚫
{{clear}}

== Provide Sources ==

''George's early emphasis on the "productive forces of nature" is now dismissed even by otherwise Georgist authors.''

That may very well be, but if the article is going to say so, it should name at least one -- preferably two -- of those "otherwise georgist authors" IMHO.
--[[User:Christofurio|Christofurio]] ([[User talk:Christofurio|talk]]) 01:18, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

== "POV" template ==
We need some discussion here about why that template was applied to this article. I am removing since the editor who added the template seems to have left no explanation. -- [[User:Derek Ross|Derek Ross]] | [[User talk:Derek Ross|Talk]]'' 19:36, 8 December 2010 (UTC)


== Ethics and Henry George ==
== Henry George's First Book ==


It was titled "Our Land and National Policy" and actually the first book that he wrote which also proposed a tax on land values. This is not generally appreciated. It was published in 1871. [[User:Macrocompassion|Macrocompassion]] ([[User talk:Macrocompassion|talk]]) 14:25, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
The article has very little matter relating to George's ethical approach to economics and to the associated social relationships. However, behind much of George's writings there is a strong ethical theme which deserves to be given some greater emphasis and this is missing. Particularly in George's philosophy of supporting free-trade and also in the approach to sharing the opportunity for access to sites of land, do we see this attitude being implied if not more directly expressed.


== Henry George and Karl Marx ==
It can be summed up by the claim by Hillel the Elder's (first century, current era) modification of the "Golden Rule" in the form: "do not do to your neighbour the things that you would not want him/her to do to you". When for example valuable and useful land is held unused, the opportunity to work it for productive purposes is lost, with the result that the macroeconomy becomes distorted and the situation of those who are working elsewhwhere and those unemployed who seek jobs is changed for the worse. Similarly when trade is constrained by the use of customs duty on imported items of goods or alternatively by the "dumping" of cheap exports, the relationships between neighbouring countries becomes strained. In this case it may even happen that war between them occurs. Thus George went further in his philosophy than in the idea of social justice by placing the responsibility for government income onto the land owners.


I find that comparing George to his contemporaries and offering more historical context is illuminating, though perhaps too speculative or original to be included in the Wikipedia article about him.
This subject was better explained in the article "Macrocompassion" (from which the present writer takes his ''nom-de-plume'') which is included in the archives of the Georgist website http://www.progress.org [[User:Macrocompassion|Macrocompassion]] ([[User talk:Macrocompassion|talk]]) 13:54, 27 April 2012 (UTC)


George is described as being a Lincoln Republican at one point. Lincoln read and admired Marx. Marx was widely read via his long running and popular English language column in the New York Tribune, one of the world's most popular newspapers at the time. It's very possible that Lincoln read these columns (Lincoln doesn't appear to have had much of a personal library), though many radical German and Prussian socialist and marxist immigrants also fought brilliantly for the Union (ex: Gen. August Willich) with whom Lincoln is also likely to have had some contact.
== Party affiliation in 1897 ==


George seems to have been a type setter at a major US newspaper at the same time as Marx's column. His claim that he didn't read Marx is curious. Maybe he meant he hadn't read Capital, which isn't an easy read. It's also interesting that George's position (or lack thereof) on the politically dominant issue of the US Civil War isn't mentioned.
It is stated that Henry George ran as an [[Independent Democrat]] for the [[New York City mayoral elections]] in 1897, but in the later article it says he run for "The Democracy of Thomas Jefferson". Was he a proponent of [[Jeffersonian democracy]] and if that is so, why isn't this said in this biographical article? [[User:The Horn Blower|The Horn Blower]] ([[User talk:The Horn Blower|talk]]) 12:02, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
: According to this source, it was simply called the "Jefferson Party". [http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=G000126] [[User:EPM|EPM]] ([[User talk:EPM|talk]]) 15:18, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
::I wrote that entry in the NY mayoral elections article. ''The [[Biographical Directory of the United States Congress]]'' is good for some things like dates but not always authoritative for others (often relying on the subject's own contribution to the biennial ''[[Official Congressional Directory|Congressional Directory]]''). For some details of the anti-boss, pro-Bryan forces that formed "The Democracy of Thomas Jefferson", see the reference I gave in the mayoral elections article to Young's [http://books.google.com/books?id=7-wJAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA152#v=onepage&q&f=false ''Single Tax Movement in the United States''] (pages 153-4). The 1929 ''[[World Almanac & Book of Facts]]'' (p. 893) lists George's 1897 candidacy under "Jeff. Dem." The [http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9B01E6D61F39E433A25757C0A9679D94669ED7CF ''New-York Times'' election report] on Nov. 4, 1897 lists George under "Jeff. D." On the other hand, "independent Democrat" is not an inherently inaccurate title, either.
::To answer your more general question, my guess is that the insurgent Democrats used "Democracy of Thomas Jefferson" to distinguish themselves as purer Democrats (closer to the Party's founder) than [[Tammany Hall]] and its successful candidate [[Robert A. Van Wyck]], first mayor of the consolidated five-borough City. But it may be worth some casual investigation into election reports, George's (tragically-fatal) campaign speeches and his writings to see if he saw some closer connection to Jeffersonian democracy. [[User:Shakescene|—— Shakescene]] ([[User talk:Shakescene|talk]]) 21:41, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
::On checking Arthur Young's account I ran across this reference, referring to the other reform candidate (who won in 1901), [[Seth Low]] of the fusionist [[Citizens Union]], a former mayor of Brooklyn and a reform Republican, ‘ He [George] justified his presence in the campaign as a reformer in addition to Low, who was so well qualified for executive work, by his Jeffersonian political theories. “He is a Republican and is fighting the machine, which is all very good as far as it goes. But he is an aristocratic reformer; I am a democratic reformer. He would help the people; I would help the people to help themselves.” ’ [[User:Shakescene|—— Shakescene]] ([[User talk:Shakescene|talk]]) 22:07, 2 March 2013 (UTC)


== Leo Tolstoy on H. George ==
As for Marx's opinion of George and Georgism-
I do have first to beg your pardon for English is not my mother tongue. As for the legacy as well as the support that George's ideas have received from famous thinkers, I feel important to mention the opinion of the man who has been said to be the "truest man of his time" by Gandhi. Moreover, if it is true that George coined the term "wage slavery", it is most likely to be the source of Tolstoy's title, ''The slavery of our time''. Unfortunately I can not find the original work of Tolstoy in English, even on Wikisource; so I will translate you what I have before my eyes from "Où est l'issu?", - something like "What is the way out.." dated "October 1900", - the work immediately preceding ''The Salvery...'' (Léon Tolstoï. Les Rayons de l’aube. Dernières études philosophiques. (Translator J.-Wladimir Bienstock), Paris; P.-V. Stock Editor, 1901, pages 393-to the end); this book is also listed in the bibliography established by his biographer Romain Rolland.). You may particularly consider to change the following sentence: "Henry George's idea... had enormous influence in his time but slowly waned throughout the 1900s," and mention the account of Tolstoy at that place. So Tolstoy wrote, chapter III; quote: "It is already thirty years ago that Henry George proposed a project which is not only reasonable, but quite realistic, to suppress the private landed property. But even in America and England (In France it was not even a question or a topic), not only his project was not accepted, but every attempt or effort was made to criticize it, and since it could not be done, then silence fell around him." So consider to say that "Leo Tolstoy consider reasonable and realistic the idea to suppress landed property"; "Despite his success as a writer in his time, George's idea rapidly vanished. As early as 1900 Leo Tolstoy stated that silence fell around him." By the way, "In 1871 he published ''Our Land Policy'', which, as further developed in 1879 under the title ''Progress and Poverty''..." (''The Britannica Encyplopaedia'', New York, 11th Ed, vol. xi, page 747), - so I add this book in his bibliography. I thank you for your attention. Good luck in your own research. AB, Qc. <small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/24.50.79.184|24.50.79.184]] ([[User talk:24.50.79.184|talk]]) 20:50, 26 January 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


"Conceding that George was "a writer of talent," Marx insisted that '*the man is in theory completely *behind the times. ' He understands nothing of the nature of surplus value."
I would accurately summarize Tolstoy's judgment in the essay I have quoted above, with a specific view to what may be said about the real meaning of the legacy of George's work in an encyclopedia, as following : "''As early as 1900 Tolstoy regretted that a silence fell around Henry George in the Western world, while viewing the idea of the abolition of landed property as a reasonable and realistic way out of poverty for Russia in contrast to revolution, socialism and trades unions.'' How could any opinion about the work of an author be of more import or accuracy than the judgment of History ? I have thus very briefly said it all: Tolstoy's view in the work quoted, the place of Henry George's ideas in the history of Russia, and above all the import of his works as exemplified by the neglect of them in a whole empire. I did my best; it is yours to decide. AB, Qc. <small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/24.50.79.184|24.50.79.184]] ([[User talk:24.50.79.184|talk]]) 23:27, 26 January 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


"Karl Marx considered the single-tax platform as a regression from the transition to communism and referred to Georgism as "capitalism's last ditch". [[User:Fieldlab|Fieldlab]] ([[User talk:Fieldlab|talk]]) 12:40, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
Tolstoy talked about Henry George in his article The Slavery of our Time, chapter IX, What is slavery ?
And he also wrote two "Letters on Henry George." http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Letter_on_Henry_George_(I)

Latest revision as of 13:19, 27 December 2024

Henry George's First Book

[edit]

It was titled "Our Land and National Policy" and actually the first book that he wrote which also proposed a tax on land values. This is not generally appreciated. It was published in 1871. Macrocompassion (talk) 14:25, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Henry George and Karl Marx

[edit]

I find that comparing George to his contemporaries and offering more historical context is illuminating, though perhaps too speculative or original to be included in the Wikipedia article about him.

George is described as being a Lincoln Republican at one point. Lincoln read and admired Marx. Marx was widely read via his long running and popular English language column in the New York Tribune, one of the world's most popular newspapers at the time. It's very possible that Lincoln read these columns (Lincoln doesn't appear to have had much of a personal library), though many radical German and Prussian socialist and marxist immigrants also fought brilliantly for the Union (ex: Gen. August Willich) with whom Lincoln is also likely to have had some contact.

George seems to have been a type setter at a major US newspaper at the same time as Marx's column. His claim that he didn't read Marx is curious. Maybe he meant he hadn't read Capital, which isn't an easy read. It's also interesting that George's position (or lack thereof) on the politically dominant issue of the US Civil War isn't mentioned.

As for Marx's opinion of George and Georgism-

"Conceding that George was "a writer of talent," Marx insisted that '*the man is in theory completely *behind the times. ' He understands nothing of the nature of surplus value."

"Karl Marx considered the single-tax platform as a regression from the transition to communism and referred to Georgism as "capitalism's last ditch". Fieldlab (talk) 12:40, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Henry_George&oldid=1265552242"