Fisiocrati e schiavitù. Contraddizioni e conflitti.

In the second half of the 18th century, a heated debate developed in France about whether to abolish slavery in the colonies. Such a debate concerned not only the ethical and legal aspects of the issue but also highlighted the importance of economic factors linked to slave organisation. At the time, the declining profitability of Caribbean plantations was a key issue. In this context, many intellectuals belonging to or associated with the physiocratic school tried to influence political decisions on the matter. This paper aims to show that the physiocrats were not always consistent with their theoretical approach, which favoured free labour over slave labour due to its lower costs and greater productivity. To illustrate this, three cases of conflict within the physiocratic intellectual sphere regarding the abolition of slavery are examined: within the Mirabeau family, between Dupont de Nemour and Turgot, and between physiocratic ideology and the colonial administrative roles of Le Mercier de la Rivière and Pierre Poivre.