[PEN-L:11328] Re: Early economists and the origin of capitalism

["Charles Brown" <CharlesB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>>> michael perelman <michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 09/18/99 10:22PM >>>
I don't have any trouble with the proposition to that both the
exploitation of British workers and the rape of the colonial lands
contributed to the development of capitalism.

In a sense, the debate is starting to concede the peripheral point that
Brad made, to which I originally objected.  I don't recall his exact
phrasing, but the idea was something like adopting more modern
technology would have allowed China to have become capitalist.  I
questioned the association between progress and the inevitability of
capitalism in successful economies.

((((((((((((((

Charles: How about adopting ruthless use of force and violence removing the Chinese peasants from their means of production, the land, and making them into wage or free labor, and ruthless use of force and violence in enslaving colonial labor would have allowed China to become capitalist ?

The rapid development of European technology was based on the establishment of free labor, which was a premise for cooperation and mechanization, the fundamental elements of the industrial/technological revolution in England especially. Wage labor was the basis for heavy domestic demand. The mass demand in England was from the newly created proletarians who had wages to spend.

For Marx, the commoditization of labor power is a defining characteristic of capitalism.


Charles Brown

((((((((((((((((((


When I look at the literature of mercantilist thought, I see that the
early economists believed that the accumulation of gold was the key to
development, until the London fire of 1670 (?) when the idea that
domestic demand could also spur development.  Also, profit meant the
sale of a good for more than it cost, suggesting that Third World trade
was important, since domestic trade could not add value through profit
upon alienation.  Finally, this literature put great emphasis upon
keeping people working for his little as possible.

Marx always suggested that the early economists were on to something.  I
agree.  The early economists, as I read them, argued that both domestic
and colonial exploitation were central to economic growth and the
development of early capitalism.

--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929

Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx