On commercial gluts Unexpected affinities between Jean-Baptiste Say and the Saint-Simonians

A standard reading in the history of economic thought considers Saint-Simonianism to be embodied in the works of a set of European social thinkers including Robert Owen, William Godwin and Sismondi, all of whom are seen as standing in strict opposition to the doctrine of laissez-faire. This article, however, argues that, during the first quarter of the 19th century, the Saint-Simonians and the liberal economist Jean-Baptiste Say can be seen to adopt convergent views on commercial gluts. First, it shows how the Saint-Simonians and Say both see undersupply and lack of industry as causes of gluts. Next, we assert that their intellectual affinities are also visible in their belief that increasing production remains an appropriate solution for gluts. Finally, this convergence is explained by their common heritage: Saint-Simonianism is embedded in a neo-Smithian tradition for which Say can be taken as representative. We argue that this legacy explains their convergence.