Abstract

In the history of modern political and economic thought, the work of Adam Smith has been of constant interest for two centuries. It has been the object of the most diverse interpretations and has continuously served as a strategic reference point for liberal and Marxist thought. For the latter, however, it does not seem to represent a substantial source of inspiration today. In contrast, liberal thinkers continue to regard themselves as the legitimate interpreters of Smith’s thought. Such a generic reference to liberal thought, obviously, may sound vague. It is difficult, however, to refer in any other way to the continuous flourishing of reflections that, before anything else, point to the market as the proper strategic place for any decision, whether or not it is combined with considerations of ethical pluralism. This is not surprising, because Smith is not an author one can ignore; it is also not surprising that liberalism does not take much pains to reinterpret Smith. In other words, liberalism does not seem to be able to do without a traditional reading of Smith—the “Mandevilleian” Smith, who taught us not to look beyond self-interest. It cannot do without this reading because liberal thought itself has created such a reading by virtually ignoring, for two centuries, the Theory of Moral Sentiments. And, even when more sophisticated interpreters take up the task of reinterpreting Smith, they are usually not willing to grant the importance due to the social, non-individualistic aspect of Smith’s ethics.