Paper short abstract:

This paper analyzes the types of arguments (i.e. political, religious or economic) used to support public discourse in the Dutch Republic regarding free trade versus monopoly in relation to Dutch Brazil in the seventeenth century.

Paper long abstract:

To answer the question 'How did free agents in Western Europe react to the creation of colonial monopolies?' this paper will research the public discourse in the Dutch Republic through the use of pamphlets. These booklets had both an economic and rhetorical value, but this research will only focus on the latter. Since the presence of Habermas' concept of 'Öffentlichkeit' in the Low Countries during the seventeenth century is highly debatable, this paper will refrain from that term and will instead focus on analyzing the types of arguments that are used in the public discourse. In other words, it will not focus on the public opinion itself, but will instead examine the arguments used for influencing 'public opinion' and analyze whether they were economic, political, or religious.

With a comparative approach this paper will focus on the public discourse regarding free trade versus monopoly in relation to Dutch Brazil (ca. 1630-1638). While one may expect the argumentation in this case to be strictly economic, this study shows that other types of arguments (i.e. political or religious) were employed in this economic stand. It will, therefore, showcase the 'translation' authors had to make between their position and what will appeal to the reader in an attempt to convince their audience.

By showing monopolies were not only fought in court but also on paper in a public discourse, this study will contribute to research on the viewpoints of both the supporters of the WIC and the antagonists. Furthermore, it shows the way both parties used various arguments to protect their self-interest.