1

Luke Gehringer

Dr. El-Rayes

MC377

2 June 2014


Cannibalism and Can-openers: Adam Smiths Cultural Relativism against a Backdrop of
Colonialism

Any distinctions that exist between human societies can be attributed to a certain degree of
historical accident and access to material resources. This highly provocative yet simple
argument articulated by Adam Smith in a series of 18th century lectures on Scottish conjectural
theory continues to challenge conventional development models. He rejects the notion of
cultural superiority used to justify past European colonial imperialism. However, by the 20th
century Smiths theory had fallen out of favor in Europe. Powerful nation-states swiftly carved
competing empires from the culturally rich continents of Asia and Africa. Intellectuals like
Durkheim, Fouillee, Saussure, and Gustave le Bon provided the theoretical justification for a
new age of imperialism. An ideological return to Smiths liberal conjectural theory exposes the
thin moral pretense of European colonialism and undermines late nineteenth century
imperialism.
History, as a narrative of victors, naturally omits or actively obscures (often unpleasant)
events that do not support the national consciousness. Marlow, an atypical civilized European
in Joseph Conrads Heart of Darkness, frequently remarks upon the hypocrisy of colonial
expansion. Sitting aboard a moored cruising yawl in the River Thames, this fictional sea
captain, pensively reminds a group of civilized Europeans that this also has been one of the
dark places of the earth (Conrad 101). Before the Romans came to conquer heathen Europe,
England, a seemingly immutable bastion of civilization, was an isolated, superstitious hunter-
Gehringer 2

gatherer society in the early stages of production. Instead of evidencing intellectual superiority,
Smith ascribes European ascendancy to a natural process of societal development that benefited
from favorable material conditions and historical accident (Pitts 26). Only in recognizing
European civilizations universally shared and humble origins, can one regard other cultures with
equity and kinship.
This recognition of the other is improved through cross-cultural exchange that Smith
outlines as essential in order to properly assess the morality of our own society (Pitts 43). Smith
understands morality to be an ever-changing response to our limited social and cultural context
(43). The further that one can remove himself from his immediate social context through cross-
cultural exchange increases the likelihood that he can objectively judge his own social customs
and practices with regard to natural and universal principles like of truth and justice (43). In this
respect, Marlows physical journey into the heart of darkness (of the African continent) is also
a metaphorical journey into the heart of civilized man (himself) that leaves him profoundly
changed and critical of his own society and its customs.
Freed from the constraints of a European sense of morality, Marlow adopts the persona of
Smiths impartial spectator in his assessment of the European colonists he encounters and the
native African savages and their customs. To operate the boat he enlisted a crew of fine
fellowscannibalsin their place. They were men one could work with, and I am grateful to
them (Conrad 156). As a rational enlightened European, Marlow surprises the reader with
his casual, perhaps ironic, attitude towards cannibalism. He does not seem bothered that the
natives, his own crew nonetheless, engage in the practice of eating one another. Instead he
mentions this shocking custom in an ancillary and nonchalant manner. He trusts them to be
aboard his ship regardless of their peculiar diet.
Gehringer 3

Smiths stadial categorization of development on a four tiered scale dangerously lends
itself to the colonial belief in racial superiority. However, he explicitly regards societies in a
lower stage of development with an understanding equitable to those in later stages by
incorporating them into his theory of natural and universal human progress (35). Smith supports
commercial civilized society on the basis of its ability to generate massive quantities of
material wealth for entire populations and create institutions that strive to uphold the natural
laws of freedom and justice (41). However, he recognizes that societies in lower stages of
development, particularly the hunter-gatherer stage, attempt to solve questions of morality in the
same way as later stages: within the confines of their social context (61). Conrad frequently
returns to the arbitrary notion of progress through the comically disastrous plight of the
European colonists who, in an exercise in futility, attempt to apply their supercilious morality in
an entirely unique social context.
The idea that individual character is something fragile and subject to rapid change
depending on environmental circumstances began to be challenged by French colonial theorists
in the latter part of the nineteenth century (Betts 59). Evolutionary ideas in science permeated
the new field of sociology theory that sought to account for stadial development and remedy the
perceived failures of colonial assimilation (61-62). Societal development could be explained
through a divergence of the races that occurred through natural Darwinian selection (61). The
races of the earth, distinguished by nature, should be kept separate through the integrity of their
own institutions, argued Saussure, or risk the outbreak revolt and war (70). Saussure pointed to
the revolts in the Philippines and Cuba and the Spanish-American War to validate his theory and
discredit attempts at assimilation. The enlightenment belief in a universal rationality and the
Gehringer 4

equity of mankind were systematically dismantled by opponents of the old theory of colonial
assimilation (71).
Alfred Fouillee described racial divergence as a centuries long process of cultural and
intellectual accumulation (61). The rational approach to remedy this phenomena was
insufficient; education and intermarriage could not breach such a profound gap that emerged
over a period of many generations (62). Le Bon expanded on Fouilles theory to claim that an
individual can never rid himself of the natural spirit of his race (66). Furthermore, a societys
institutions and customs will always be indicative of this national character (67). Perhaps
utilizing Smiths four stage categorization of development, le Bon attributed each race a status of
primitive, inferior, intermediate or superior (68).
In contrast with this absurdity, the moral superiority and technological advantages of
commercial society becomes strikingly less clear in the context of colonialism. By nature of its
complexity, commercial society requires the sacrifice of some personal freedom in order to
operate smoothly; all members must perform their designated tasks and behave within the
confines of a set of social norms to which they have previously agreed. Smith notes how this
can discourage independent thought and increase dependence on social and commercial
institutions (41). The irony of colonialism lies in this truth: the colonizers regard the natives as
infantile in their simplicity and technological ignorance, when in actuality the Europeans are the
ones who are helpless when removed from the safety of their institutions. Conrad exposes this
through the dramatic foil of the African native and the unfettered environment. The two
colonists in Outpost of Progress, Kayerts and Callier, are feckless on their own in a hilarious yet
tragic display of ineptitude:
Gehringer 5

Few men realize that their life, the very essence of their character, their capabilities and
their audacities, are only the expression of their belief in the safety of their surroundings.
The courage, the composure, the confidence; the emotions and principles; every great and
every insignificant thought belongs not to the individual but to the crowd: to the crowd
that believes blindly in the irresistible force of its institutions and of its morals, in the
power of its police and of its opinion. But the contact with pure unmitigated savagery,
with primitive nature and primitive man, brings sudden and profound trouble into the
heart. To the sentiment of being alone of one's kind, to the clear perception of the
loneliness of one's thoughts, of one's sensationsto the negation of the habitual, which is
safe, there is added the affirmation of the unusual, which is dangerous; a suggestion of
things vague, uncontrollable, and repulsive, whose discomposing intrusion excites the
imagination and tries the civilized nerves of the foolish and the wise alike (Conrad 51).
Bereft of the safety of their institutions and principles, the two men must rely on themselves and
their surroundings for moral guidance. Their climactic battle over a singular cube of sugar lays
bare the ridiculous notion of civilized man and the desperate yet futile attempt to retain
polished ideals in an inhospitable environment.
For Kayerts and Callier, their hand in the sale of company men into slavery is so
abhorrent that it calls into question their identity and sense of purpose. The experience was so
traumatic that it led to an inarticulate feeling that something from within them was gone,
something that worked for their safety, and had kept the wilderness from interfering with their
hearts (Conrad 20). Their actions forced a re-examination of themselves and the idea of moral
superiority.
Gehringer 6

Smith claims that slavery was actually abolished in Europe for materially self-interested
reasons; the King abolished slavery in order undermine the power of the nobility (Pitts 31). It
was only after slavery was abolished that it was adapted to fit the historically convenient
narrative of an intellectually and morally superior European appreciation for human dignity (31).
When the two men realize that they are capable of selling their fellow man into bondage, this
artificial narrative of European superiority suddenly collapses along with their identity.
The precarious and artificial nature of the European identity, grounded in the safety of
their institutions and not vice versa, supports Smiths theory of morality as shaped by our
experiences and social circumstances. Their spectacular moral collapse when faced with the
new and unfamiliar undermines le Bons argument of national character as a determinant of
racial superiority and justification for European colonialism. Rather than emissaries of
knowledge and progress, the European colonizers are like the blindfolded woman in Kurtzs
painting: their attempt to bring civilization to mankind is futile. Although the cave is
illuminated, the woman remains blind to her own darkness.











Gehringer 7

Works Cited

Conrad, Joseph, and Cedric Watts. Heart of Darkness and Other Tales. Oxford: Oxford UP,
2008. Print.

Betts, Raymond F. "Assimilation and the Scientific Attitude."
Assimilation and Association in French Colonial Theory, 1890-1914. New York:
Columbia UP, 1961. N. pag. Print.

Pitts, Jennifer. "Adam Smith on Societal Development and Colonial Rule."
A Turn to Empire: The Rise of Imperial Liberalism in Britain and France.
Princeton: Princeton UP, 2005. N. pag. Print.































Gehringer 8

notes

The overweening conceit which the greater part of men have of their own abilities is an
antient evil remarked on by philosophers and moralists of all ages. Their absurd presumption
in their own good fortune has been less taken note of