What do you think?
Rate this book
Pax Economica: Left-Wing Visions of a Free Trade World
The forgotten history of the liberal radicals, socialist internationalists, feminists, and Christians who envisioned free trade as the necessary prerequisite for anti-imperialism and peace
Today, free trade is often associated with right-wing free marketeers. In Pax Economica , historian Marc-William Palen shows that free trade and globalisation in fact have roots in nineteenth-century left-wing politics. In this counterhistory of an idea, Palen explores how, beginning in the 1840s, left-wing globalists became the leaders of the peace and anti-imperialist movements of their age. By the early twentieth century, an unlikely alliance of liberal radicals, socialist internationalists, feminists, and Christians envisioned free trade as essential for a prosperous and peaceful world order. Of course, this vision was at odds with the era’s strong predilections for nationalism, protectionism, geopolitical conflict, and colonial expansion. Palen reveals how, for some of its most radical left-wing adherents, free trade represented a hard-nosed critique of imperialism, militarism, and war.
Palen shows that the anti-imperial component of free trade was a phenomenon that came to encompass the political left wing within the British, American, Spanish, German, Dutch, Belgian, Italian, Russian, French, and Japanese empires. The left-wing vision of a “pax economica” evolved to include supranational regulation to maintain a peaceful free-trading system―which paved the way for a more liberal economic order after World War II and such institutions as the United Nations, the European Union, and the World Trade Organization. Palen’s findings upend how we think about globalisation, free trade, anti-imperialism, and peace. Rediscovering the left-wing history of globalism offers timely lessons for our own era of economic nationalism and geopolitical conflict.
Today, free trade is often associated with right-wing free marketeers. In Pax Economica , historian Marc-William Palen shows that free trade and globalisation in fact have roots in nineteenth-century left-wing politics. In this counterhistory of an idea, Palen explores how, beginning in the 1840s, left-wing globalists became the leaders of the peace and anti-imperialist movements of their age. By the early twentieth century, an unlikely alliance of liberal radicals, socialist internationalists, feminists, and Christians envisioned free trade as essential for a prosperous and peaceful world order. Of course, this vision was at odds with the era’s strong predilections for nationalism, protectionism, geopolitical conflict, and colonial expansion. Palen reveals how, for some of its most radical left-wing adherents, free trade represented a hard-nosed critique of imperialism, militarism, and war.
Palen shows that the anti-imperial component of free trade was a phenomenon that came to encompass the political left wing within the British, American, Spanish, German, Dutch, Belgian, Italian, Russian, French, and Japanese empires. The left-wing vision of a “pax economica” evolved to include supranational regulation to maintain a peaceful free-trading system―which paved the way for a more liberal economic order after World War II and such institutions as the United Nations, the European Union, and the World Trade Organization. Palen’s findings upend how we think about globalisation, free trade, anti-imperialism, and peace. Rediscovering the left-wing history of globalism offers timely lessons for our own era of economic nationalism and geopolitical conflict.
328 pages, Hardcover
Published February 27, 2024
24 people are currently reading
976 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
Read
December 25, 2025Capitalists and leftists are both in agreement on globalization, free trade, and free migration? Wow, I didn't know that, you're telling me now for the first time.
Pax Economica does a great job in outlining the development of left/liberal political economic thought through the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, focusing mostly on the contentious issue of free trade. While I have some qualms (such as the old strawmanning of American System economics as “neomercantilism”), the book is informative and succinct.
In the wake of the period of neoliberal consensus, leftists in the West have largely given up on seriously discussing big, boring questions of political economy such as trade policy and industry, choosing instead to go all in on social issues and welfare programs. But for a long time, left/liberal thinkers championed the prescriptions that today are now associated with the nominally right-wing neoliberals. Marx and Engels themselves voiced support for free trade, believing it would accelerate the contradictions in capitalism and hasten the destruction of the system. Richard Cobden and his idealistic acolytes believed it would result in cheap food, prosperity, and world peace. Christian social activist groups advocated for free trade believing it was in accordance with God’s will and Divine law.
Thinkers in socialist/communist regimes (such as Lenin in Russia and Mao in China) often wrote in favour of free trade early in their writings, but upon ascending to power quickly ran up against the realities of attempting to industrialize a country while playing from behind. They put their ideology to the side and followed the path to industrialization which many other countries had followed previously, outlined in Friedrich List’s influential The National System of Political Economy: high tariff walls, restrictions on imports, and subsidies for budding industry.
Seemingly not within the scope of the book, perhaps to its detriment, is a critical examination of the claims from free trade ideologues. Claims that free trade and globalization would bring about world fraternity failed to live up to historical reality. In the mid 19th century, given only some passing mentions in the book, Britain began brutally pushing free trade on its colonies and around the world with the explicit intention of suppressing industrialization, knowing that its advantage in productive power was so great that other countries would never be able to get off the ground in a “free market”. During the American Civil War, British financiers collaborated with the Confederacy in order to prop up its degenerate, agrarian slave economy. These examples are not mere incidents of history, but the natural tendency of free trade.
In the 1970s and 80s, free traders got what they had long been advocating for in a Faustian bargain. Neoliberalism’s ascendancy brought the expansion of free trade, free migration, and supranational governance. With it also brought a culling of the welfare state, a string of military interventions, and the increased power of capital, to the displeasure of the left/liberal free traders. Accusations that the neoliberals had “co-opted free trade as a neocolonial tool” are unconvincing when the historical precedent is there to see and the writings of the protectionist thinkers, predicting exactly such an outcome, were ignored.
Always clinging desperately to ideology, inability to distinguish between is and ought and to reconcile impact with intent is a common motif through much of leftist thought. The left/liberal fantasy of free trade - interdependence, peace, prosperity, equality - exists only in the imagination. The reality of free trade and globalization - bankers doing labour arbitrage and shipping your productive power to third world countries with a comparative advantage (that is, slave labour) in a race to the bottom, competing with the world’s poorest for the few jobs left at home, and less overall wealth concentrated in fewer hands - is what we see today. It may not be exactly the world you envisoned, but it’s the world you’ve made nonetheless.
Pax Economica does a great job in outlining the development of left/liberal political economic thought through the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, focusing mostly on the contentious issue of free trade. While I have some qualms (such as the old strawmanning of American System economics as “neomercantilism”), the book is informative and succinct.
In the wake of the period of neoliberal consensus, leftists in the West have largely given up on seriously discussing big, boring questions of political economy such as trade policy and industry, choosing instead to go all in on social issues and welfare programs. But for a long time, left/liberal thinkers championed the prescriptions that today are now associated with the nominally right-wing neoliberals. Marx and Engels themselves voiced support for free trade, believing it would accelerate the contradictions in capitalism and hasten the destruction of the system. Richard Cobden and his idealistic acolytes believed it would result in cheap food, prosperity, and world peace. Christian social activist groups advocated for free trade believing it was in accordance with God’s will and Divine law.
Thinkers in socialist/communist regimes (such as Lenin in Russia and Mao in China) often wrote in favour of free trade early in their writings, but upon ascending to power quickly ran up against the realities of attempting to industrialize a country while playing from behind. They put their ideology to the side and followed the path to industrialization which many other countries had followed previously, outlined in Friedrich List’s influential The National System of Political Economy: high tariff walls, restrictions on imports, and subsidies for budding industry.
Seemingly not within the scope of the book, perhaps to its detriment, is a critical examination of the claims from free trade ideologues. Claims that free trade and globalization would bring about world fraternity failed to live up to historical reality. In the mid 19th century, given only some passing mentions in the book, Britain began brutally pushing free trade on its colonies and around the world with the explicit intention of suppressing industrialization, knowing that its advantage in productive power was so great that other countries would never be able to get off the ground in a “free market”. During the American Civil War, British financiers collaborated with the Confederacy in order to prop up its degenerate, agrarian slave economy. These examples are not mere incidents of history, but the natural tendency of free trade.
In the 1970s and 80s, free traders got what they had long been advocating for in a Faustian bargain. Neoliberalism’s ascendancy brought the expansion of free trade, free migration, and supranational governance. With it also brought a culling of the welfare state, a string of military interventions, and the increased power of capital, to the displeasure of the left/liberal free traders. Accusations that the neoliberals had “co-opted free trade as a neocolonial tool” are unconvincing when the historical precedent is there to see and the writings of the protectionist thinkers, predicting exactly such an outcome, were ignored.
Always clinging desperately to ideology, inability to distinguish between is and ought and to reconcile impact with intent is a common motif through much of leftist thought. The left/liberal fantasy of free trade - interdependence, peace, prosperity, equality - exists only in the imagination. The reality of free trade and globalization - bankers doing labour arbitrage and shipping your productive power to third world countries with a comparative advantage (that is, slave labour) in a race to the bottom, competing with the world’s poorest for the few jobs left at home, and less overall wealth concentrated in fewer hands - is what we see today. It may not be exactly the world you envisoned, but it’s the world you’ve made nonetheless.
October 4, 2024
In a world where tariffs have been reintroduced as a method of economic security and protectionism, this recently published and powerful treatise functions to take back the history and remind readers that “free trade remained a central tenet among left-wing internationalists working within the era’s anti-imperial and peace movements to overturn the neomercantilist order.” Indeed, it’s no accident that our world has come to feature free trade as an inherent good in agreements between various nations. Through this work, Marc-William Palen chronicles several advocates that waged a “century-long left-wing free-trade fight for a more peaceful, anti-imperial world order.” It is an important lesson to consider.
From the beginning, a theoretical response to imperialism was required. Important theorists, including Marx and Engels, Kautsky, and Cobden advanced several ideas and attitudes which stood in direct contrast to the economic nationalism at the heart of a previously imperialist protectionist policy. Yet the struggle would not have been complete without the cooperation of several other actors; among them, Democratic Socialists, Feminists, Christian Pacifists, and FDR’s Secretary of State Cordell Hull, all of whom contributed in differing ways. For example, the blending of feminist activism and Christian activism found its zenith when the YWCA became an outright peace group in 1922. Their voice and influence continued to grow, and in 1936, the YWCA came out in support of free trade as a “prerequisite for world peace.” Such voices were difficult to ignore.
The fight for free trade bucked up against a status quo of economic nationalism that saw an important half-measure argument form, published in Friedrich List’s The National System of Political Economy that advocated that “Western developing nations’ infant industries required a combination of colonialism and protectionism to catch up to the more advanced British; universal free trade ought to occur only once worldwide developmental parity was achieved at some undefined point down the road.” Such theories continued to build upon the inequalities that had already formed between what would become the global North and global South, the impacts of which linger today.
4 stars. Reading about free trade, economic protectionism, and the detrimental effects of tariffs upon global trade may not be for everyone. Still, I found this history incredibly useful in better understanding what the current call for increased tariffs in international trade might create during the 21st Century. If our world proceeds down that path, we will be, in effect, repealing the hard-fought battles of old Leftists whose ideas have proven meritorious, and taken a step backward toward an economic nationalism that threatens our own economic security and multilateral world. Compelling.
From the beginning, a theoretical response to imperialism was required. Important theorists, including Marx and Engels, Kautsky, and Cobden advanced several ideas and attitudes which stood in direct contrast to the economic nationalism at the heart of a previously imperialist protectionist policy. Yet the struggle would not have been complete without the cooperation of several other actors; among them, Democratic Socialists, Feminists, Christian Pacifists, and FDR’s Secretary of State Cordell Hull, all of whom contributed in differing ways. For example, the blending of feminist activism and Christian activism found its zenith when the YWCA became an outright peace group in 1922. Their voice and influence continued to grow, and in 1936, the YWCA came out in support of free trade as a “prerequisite for world peace.” Such voices were difficult to ignore.
The fight for free trade bucked up against a status quo of economic nationalism that saw an important half-measure argument form, published in Friedrich List’s The National System of Political Economy that advocated that “Western developing nations’ infant industries required a combination of colonialism and protectionism to catch up to the more advanced British; universal free trade ought to occur only once worldwide developmental parity was achieved at some undefined point down the road.” Such theories continued to build upon the inequalities that had already formed between what would become the global North and global South, the impacts of which linger today.
4 stars. Reading about free trade, economic protectionism, and the detrimental effects of tariffs upon global trade may not be for everyone. Still, I found this history incredibly useful in better understanding what the current call for increased tariffs in international trade might create during the 21st Century. If our world proceeds down that path, we will be, in effect, repealing the hard-fought battles of old Leftists whose ideas have proven meritorious, and taken a step backward toward an economic nationalism that threatens our own economic security and multilateral world. Compelling.
December 31, 2025
I generally liked this political economy history of thought and think it would be accessible to most interested lay readers. The book covers about a century of ideas and activism from the founding of the Manchester School and Richard Cobden's work to repeal the Corn Laws in the 1840s up to the end of the second world war (the last chapter is the only one to discuss events after that point). I read this partly in mind of whether I would assign it in a class or use it as a reference book, but I don't think it quite meets my threshold for an undergraduate course because it doesn't include a primer chapter or section on the theory of trade, comparative advantage, and why tariffs don't work. I think the book would have strongly benefited from such a chapter or section (perhaps after Chapter 1 or woven into the introduction), and if there is ever another edition, perhaps it will. Chapter 1 was pretty effective in its argument linking imperialism and economic nationalism, but I then found that Chapter 2's discussion of the anti-imperialism of free trade mostly re-tread the same ground from a different perspective. The strongest chapters were Chapters 3 (Marx and Manchester), 4 (Free-Trade Feminism), and 5 (the links between Christian pacifists and the free trade movement). I do think the book has the feeling of articles smoothed over and stapled together, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, and I would be comfortable assigning individual chapters in class.
I found Chapter 6 (covering the leftist shift away from free trade since World War II) to be the weakest and most biased. This is not the first book I've read from a more leftist author who, in the eleventh hour, phones in their arguments against the right by specifically holding up F.A. Hayek as a neoliberal archvillain. You cannot repeatedly (and I mean repeatedly) use the phrase "neoliberals such as" and then only ever list Hayek, except for the one time you mention Milton Friedman (while confusing his actions with those of his students in Chile) without making me question how well you know your opposition. I am a sympathetic reader and I still found this thread poorly researched. When Palen criticizes other historical movements, such as the anti-feminists (the original trad wives) in Chapter 4, he is able to cite multiple examples and avoids biased characterizations, and similarly devotes a chapter each to both the imperialists (Chapter 1) and the anti-imperialists (Chapter 2), so I know he's capable of thorough research and not leaning on a single example to make his argument.
That said, I found the material in Chapters 1 and 2 to be a good overview and introduction to the backdrop and Chapters 3-5 were particularly well done. Chapter 4 on the links between free traders and feminists was particularly relevant to my interests. I was delighted to see Palen start the chapter with a discussion of Harriet Martineau and Florence Nightingale, and I must have made a hundred notes on this chapter for future research. I was especially interested to see the trend of daughters carrying on their fathers work, from Annie Cobden and Jane Cobden Unwin, to Fanny Garrison Villard, to Tatiana Sukhotin-Tolstoy, to Anna Angela George de Mill. Jane Addams' 'Pax Economica' is also a great detail, as is the history of the Monopoly board game, first envisioned as The Landlord's Game developed by Lizzie Magie.
The economic nationalism of anti-colonialism was also interesting to learn about in the context of these movements, as was the overlap between free trade with no barriers between nations and the push to end sovereignty with supranational governance. Palen argues that Marx and Engels were also in favor of free trade, although I think he overstates the extent or conflates the intent of their support here, as almost everyone else in the movement favored free trade on its merits of growth, cheaper food, and peace, while Marx and Engels supported it as the next step towards socialist revolution and the end of capitalism. When he was introduced in Chapter 6 as supporting free trade, I had to wonder if Che Guevara had similar motivations. Finally, I was interested in learning more about the single-tax movement (i.e., taxing land as the only tax to replace tariffs) and would have liked to see more economic discussion of the functionality and effects of such a tax, even if in brief. I am still wondering why List's ideas were so successful and helped propel the German Historical School forward when he died so soon after his ideas were published. I expect there's a political economy reason or that his family pushed his ideas after his death, but this wasn't addressed in the text. When Palen talked about Ghana's economic nationalism after independence, I was curious if he would talk about the Botswana case in contrast, but he did not, which I think is a missed opportunity.
Overall, I think this is a generally well-researched book and that chapters may be of particular relevance for a course or further research, but I think Chapter 6 holds the book back from 5 stars.
I found Chapter 6 (covering the leftist shift away from free trade since World War II) to be the weakest and most biased. This is not the first book I've read from a more leftist author who, in the eleventh hour, phones in their arguments against the right by specifically holding up F.A. Hayek as a neoliberal archvillain. You cannot repeatedly (and I mean repeatedly) use the phrase "neoliberals such as" and then only ever list Hayek, except for the one time you mention Milton Friedman (while confusing his actions with those of his students in Chile) without making me question how well you know your opposition. I am a sympathetic reader and I still found this thread poorly researched. When Palen criticizes other historical movements, such as the anti-feminists (the original trad wives) in Chapter 4, he is able to cite multiple examples and avoids biased characterizations, and similarly devotes a chapter each to both the imperialists (Chapter 1) and the anti-imperialists (Chapter 2), so I know he's capable of thorough research and not leaning on a single example to make his argument.
That said, I found the material in Chapters 1 and 2 to be a good overview and introduction to the backdrop and Chapters 3-5 were particularly well done. Chapter 4 on the links between free traders and feminists was particularly relevant to my interests. I was delighted to see Palen start the chapter with a discussion of Harriet Martineau and Florence Nightingale, and I must have made a hundred notes on this chapter for future research. I was especially interested to see the trend of daughters carrying on their fathers work, from Annie Cobden and Jane Cobden Unwin, to Fanny Garrison Villard, to Tatiana Sukhotin-Tolstoy, to Anna Angela George de Mill. Jane Addams' 'Pax Economica' is also a great detail, as is the history of the Monopoly board game, first envisioned as The Landlord's Game developed by Lizzie Magie.
The economic nationalism of anti-colonialism was also interesting to learn about in the context of these movements, as was the overlap between free trade with no barriers between nations and the push to end sovereignty with supranational governance. Palen argues that Marx and Engels were also in favor of free trade, although I think he overstates the extent or conflates the intent of their support here, as almost everyone else in the movement favored free trade on its merits of growth, cheaper food, and peace, while Marx and Engels supported it as the next step towards socialist revolution and the end of capitalism. When he was introduced in Chapter 6 as supporting free trade, I had to wonder if Che Guevara had similar motivations. Finally, I was interested in learning more about the single-tax movement (i.e., taxing land as the only tax to replace tariffs) and would have liked to see more economic discussion of the functionality and effects of such a tax, even if in brief. I am still wondering why List's ideas were so successful and helped propel the German Historical School forward when he died so soon after his ideas were published. I expect there's a political economy reason or that his family pushed his ideas after his death, but this wasn't addressed in the text. When Palen talked about Ghana's economic nationalism after independence, I was curious if he would talk about the Botswana case in contrast, but he did not, which I think is a missed opportunity.
Overall, I think this is a generally well-researched book and that chapters may be of particular relevance for a course or further research, but I think Chapter 6 holds the book back from 5 stars.
July 10, 2025
very interesting history on left-wing free trade. I hope the left can rediscover this. too much economic nationalism these days :(
November 11, 2024
Don't get me wrong, this bad boy is capital D DENSE, but it is also the best utilization of layman's terms to describe the cyclical nature of global (focusing on US) economic approaches to nationalism through restrictive and free market trade. It is a fantastic read, incredible informative and takes a broad stance on how various populations pulled for a liberalized view of free trade. This book ends with a brief analysis of 2022 economic policies under the Biden Administration (more protective and conservative than you would think) and starts with a satirical play that is a little less funny than you would think. Highly recommend if you like economics or just want to learn a bit more about what makes the world go round. Money.
December 21, 2025
muito interessante análise histórica, mas é um livro que fica repetindo os mesmos argumentos de novo e de novo com roupagens levemente diferentes. acho que faltou exploração da relação entre esquerda e o argumento listiano e de perspectivas mais concretas do livre comércio como algo "de esquerda"
July 15, 2025
Super pregled precej neznane koalicije. Bring Back Cobden
August 23, 2025
'It seems to be the fate of idealists to obtain what they have struggled for in a form which destroys their ideals.'
Bertrand Russell
Bertrand Russell
September 13, 2025
2.5
I wish the entire book was in the style of chapters 1 and 6...
I wish the entire book was in the style of chapters 1 and 6...
September 29, 2025
Painfully, profoundly relevant for today.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews