AHC/WI: Major Benthamite social movement

In our timeline, the writings of certain political philosophers have spawned ideologies and social movements which in turn have influenced the world greatly. John Locke's liberalism created the foundation for the United States, Karl Marx's communism made the Soviet Union a reality, and so on and so forth.

Jeremy Bentham was and remains an influential philosopher, but his ideas failed to develop into a proper "ideology" which could in turn inspire a major social movement. Utilitarianism is defended by philosophy professors and people with too much time on their hands (like me), not politicians, revolutionaries or activists.

Could this be changed? What shape could such a social movement take? What could the consequences be?

You might be interested in Clive-Less World by Tony Jones in which Bentham's ideas were developed into a political ideology called "Utilitarian Economic Rationalism" which later establishes itself as the main ideology of the Russian Empire and other states.

I actually am working on a timeline in which a series of events (such as Sir Samuel Bentham being employed by King Gustav III of Sweden rather than the Russian Prince Potemkin, Jeremy Bentham getting into correspondence with Finnish economist Anders Chydenius and the introduction of Draconian censure laws in Britain as part of an anti-Jacobin reactionary wave), Jeremy Bentham and a lot of people in his philosophical circle go into exile to Stockholm in the early 19th century. There he ends up having quite some influence upon the re-emerged Hat and Cap parties (though in very different ways, of course).

Hnau said:

You might be interested in Clive-Less World by Tony Jones in which Bentham's ideas were developed into a political ideology called "Utilitarian Economic Rationalism" which later establishes itself as the main ideology of the Russian Empire and other states.

Click to expand...

Oh right, I remember that one now! But to be completely honest, the description of UER mostly left me confused. I don't really understand the emphasis on letting things go and what that would actually mean in practice, and the connections to Bentham's ideas are not all that apparent to me. Do you know if Tony Jones has written about this ideology elsewhere?

(Also, I very much doubt that a totalitarian police state is the best way to maximize happiness, but then again I also doubt that a totalitarian police state is the best way to create a classless society, so I guess that kind of irrationality has historical precedence.)

Makemakean said:

I actually am working on a timeline in which a series of events (such as Sir Samuel Bentham being employed by King Gustav III of Sweden rather than the Russian Prince Potemkin, Jeremy Bentham getting into correspondence with Finnish economist Anders Chydenius and the introduction of Draconian censure laws in Britain as part of an anti-Jacobin reactionary wave), Jeremy Bentham and a lot of people in his philosophical circle go into exile to Stockholm in the early 19th century. There he ends up having quite some influence upon the re-emerged Hat and Cap parties (though in very different ways, of course).

Click to expand...

As a Swedish Bentham-fan, this sounds very interesting to me! Would you mind providing a link to your timeline in this thread if you ever decide to put it up here on the forum?

I'm not sure logic makes too much difference in the ideologies that take off or not. The main factors usually are:

(a) emotional. e.g.
- Monarchism (taking advantage of the innate sense of admiration for famous people many seem to have)
- Liberalism (don't stop me doing what I want!)
- Communism (screw the rich folk!)

(b) justifying one group's self-interest. e.g.
- Nationalism (your country of choice)
- Liberalism (the merchant middle class)
- Socialism (the poor masses)

I can't see utilitarianism having widespread emotional appeal, nor can I see a particular societal group becoming a champion of it.

Socrates said:

I can't see utilitarianism having widespread emotional appeal, nor can I see a particular societal group becoming a champion of it.

Click to expand...

Not necessarily. Bentham was an early proponent of women's rights, decriminalization of homosexuality and animal welfare - all ideas which have spawned large political movements in more modern times. In addition, he championed several liberal causes (the separation of church and government, free trade, individual legal rights and so on and so forth), although from another perspective than the liberalism which inspired the ideological foundation of United States. Based on this, as well as the core of the philosophy of utilitarianism itself, I can see a few groups that are likely to embrace a Bentham-based ideology:

- Hedonists: Obviously, a philosophy which advocates the decriminalization of pleasurable activities is going to be popular with people who enjoy pleasure.

- Disenfranchised groups: Women, slaves, sexual minorities and other groups which have been disenfranchised by society should be proponents of utilitarianism.

- The middle class: Bentham's economic thoughts are likely to appeal to the bourgeoisie, just like liberalism in our timeline.

- The poor: Bentham was an advocate of poor relief.

Alkahest said:

Oh right, I remember that one now! But to be completely honest, the description of UER mostly left me confused. I don't really understand the emphasis on letting things go and what that would actually mean in practice, and the connections to Bentham's ideas are not all that apparent to me. Do you know if Tony Jones has written about this ideology elsewhere?

(Also, I very much doubt that a totalitarian police state is the best way to maximize happiness, but then again I also doubt that a totalitarian police state is the best way to create a classless society, so I guess that kind of irrationality has historical precedence.)

Click to expand...

It seems like a logical step to incorporate Panopticon-esque ideas into Utilitarianism, given that Bentham came up with both.

Hnau said:

It seems like a logical step to incorporate Panopticon-esque ideas into Utilitarianism, given that Bentham came up with both.

Click to expand...

That would certainly be interesting, although I don't think that idea would be as obvious in the 19th century as it is now. Back when Bentham first envisioned the Panopticon the only even remotely realistic way of implementing it limited it to a single building. In a world with CCTV and Internet surveillance the idea of monitoring an entire society might seem feasible, but in Bentham's time it would have been pure science fiction.

But one can certainly incorporate ideas about surveillance and/or transparency in a Benthamite ideology, and more modern versions could very well put a lot of emphasis on the applications of Big Brother technology.