The Invisible Hand and the General Will: Rethinking Social Well-being

Abstract

What does it truly mean for a society to prosper? At first glance, prosperity may appear to consist in producing more, generating wealth, and improving material conditions. Yet this definition is insufficient when economic growth coexists with deep inequality, relations of dependence, or unequal access to the benefits of production. This article places Adam Smith and Jean-Jacques Rousseau in dialogue in order to examine the relationship between economic prosperity and social well-being. Smith explains how the division of labor, exchange, and the pursuit of individual improvement can expand productive capacity; Rousseau directs attention to freedom, the general will, and the conditions of legitimate political association. Through a conceptual comparison and an exploratory analysis of six representative economies—Denmark, the United States, Germany, the Republic of Korea, Costa Rica, and Mexico—the article argues that wealth creation is necessary but not sufficient for social prosperity. GDP per capita, inequality, and life expectancy reveal different combinations of material capacity and socially shared outcomes. The cases do not prove the doctrines of either thinker; rather, they show the contemporary relevance of their combined questions. Prosperity is more adequately understood as the institutional conversion of productive capacity into broadly accessible capabilities under conditions citizens can regard as legitimate.