Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk on Friedrich List’s Das nationale System der politischen Oekonomie (1885)

Böhm-Bawerk’s brief review assesses the seventh edition of List’s principal work, published in 1883 with a historical and critical introduction by K. Th. Eheberg. Its central argument is that List remains worth reading once partisan enthusiasm and hostility give way to historical judgment. The demand for another edition establishes the continuing readership of protectionism’s classic; Böhm-Bawerk explicitly endorses that interest without endorsing all of List’s doctrines.

The review proceeds from reception history to a differentiated assessment of List as economic theorist, social-policy thinker, and writer. Böhm-Bawerk places him below the greatest theorists but recognizes his substantial intellectual standing. His strongest praise concerns List’s sensitivity to national economic needs and his capacity to bring them into public consciousness and practical politics against a dominant theory. Literary force reinforces that achievement, though it also carries passion and exaggeration:

So bietet List seinem Leser viel Wahrheit, gemischt mit manchem Falschen und vielen Uebertreibungen, Alles mit Kraft und Originalität vorgetragen.

English translation: Thus List offers his reader much truth, mixed with a good deal that is false and with many exaggerations, all of it presented with force and originality.

This judgment separates practical insight and persuasive power from theoretical reliability. List’s enduring value does not require treating him as an infallible authority. Instead, reading him profitably requires the critical-historical orientation supplied by Eheberg’s introduction, which situates his intervention, recounts his life and activity, and assesses their scientific significance.

So sei denn das Werk in seiner neuen Gestalt dem deutschen Publikum auf's Beste empfohlen.

English translation: Let the work, then, in its new form be most warmly recommended to the German public.

The concluding recommendation therefore concerns both List’s continued relevance and the value of the edition’s framing. Böhm-Bawerk’s core move is to replace an all-or-nothing judgment of a contested economic thinker with distinct assessments of theory, political efficacy, and literary achievement. The review offers a measured account of why a work containing errors and exaggerations can still provide instruction and intellectual stimulus.