John Ruskin’s Political Economy: ‘There is No Wealth but Life’ Christopher May In 2010 it will be 150 years since John Ruskin’s major intervention in political economy was published. While in many ways Ruskin remains a well-known British commentator, his work on political economy has languished, relatively under-appreciated and seldom discussed. In this short review of Ruskin’s political economy, the central aspects of his analysis are introduced and summarised. This is then allied to a short indication of how these ideas remain (especially) relevant today, as a prompt to those interested in thinking through analytical alternatives in light of the current travails of contemporary capitalism, to examine and re-engage with John Ruskin’s insights into the character and problems of economics. Keywords: John Ruskin; political economy; capitalism; welfare It is now 150 years since John Ruskin published his thoughts on political economy in The Cornhill Magazine (republished as Unto this Last) to a largely hostile response, and these views have often been derided or dismissed since (Henderson 2000, 21; Moore 2000, 73). Nevertheless, in 1906, more than any other book, new Labour Members of Parliament cited Unto this Last as that which had influenced them the most (Henderson 2000, 26). There remain some good reasons to read Ruskin’s political economy, not least as conventional/mainstream economics has largely failed either to predict our current travails or to offer a clear alternative to the unreformed system that brought us to this juncture (Lawson 2009; Schneider and Kirchgässner 2009). Like others (before and after him) Ruskin focused on the detrimental impact of unfettered markets on the social whole, but what is interesting about Ruskin is his ethic of responsibility. Rather than suggest that large and impersonal economic forces are to blame for unpalatable economic outcomes, it is our unthinking acceptance of the presentation of this market logic that causes difficulties. Certainly, Ruskin’s focus on personal responsibility and the social impact of our actions suggests an agent-centred approach to political economy, but he does not fix on economic rationality and/or utility maximisation. Because we can choose how to treat others and these choices have consequences, Ruskin argues that economic change is driven by individual ethical choices, not rational material interests. Although Ruskin’s concerns about the economic organisation of society were never the subject of a concise thematic statement, in two publications—The Political Economy of Art and Unto This Last—he made a range of points that can be used to construct his political economy (Ruskin 1912 [1857] and 1997 [1862]). 1 Ruskin’s remarks on political economy were not limited to these texts, but for the sake of clarity it is on these texts that I concentrate. Without attempting the extensive treatment that others have offered of Ruskin’s political economy (see, for instance, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-856X.2010.00406.x BJPIR: 2010 VOL 12, 189–204 © 2010 The Author. Journal compilation © 2010 Political Studies Association