ABSTRACT

This paper considers T.H. Green’s theory of property in relation to recent studies of late nineteenth and early twentieth century liberal democratic thought. It is argued that neither the ‘Marxist’ spectacles worn by C.B. Macpherson nor the ‘Whiggish’ ones of Melvin Richter, Peter Clarke and Stefan Collini produce very clear or accurate images of Green’s political philosophy. Macpherson’s Green appears on close examination as yet another possessive individualist, while the ‘Whigs’ take a turn of the century standpoint and describe Green as holding positions that are ambivalent and fit awkwardly into the categories of individualism/collectivism. In the remainder of the paper it is argued Green’s property theory is best understood by focussing on his interest in the relationship between social life and personal development. By drawing on Green’s published and unpublished writings it can be shown that Green’s idea of personal development could be expressed in other language than that of economic individualism and that it cut across the individualist/collectivist categories in terms of which it is often discussed.

Recent studies of late nineteenth century liberal democratic theory often contain discussions of T.H. Green’s place within the tradition. Green’s conception of property is seen as providing a significant link between his form of liberalism and that of other liberals like John Stuart Mill and L.T. Hobhouse. Within this body of scholarship it is possible to identify two distinct strands that can be characterised in terms of the sort of perspective brought to bear on Green’s work. Green’s theory of property has been interpreted through both ‘Marxist’ and ‘Whiggish’ spectacles. It is arguable that neither of these perspectives provides a useful or accurate way of recovering the meaning of T.H. Green’s political philosophy. In the discussion that follows critical statements of the Whig and Marxist approaches will be supported by the development of a reading of Green’s work that emphasises the importance of the notion of personal development in coming to an understanding of his conception of property.