Capitalism and the Historians [Paperback]

I am intrigued by this collection of essays in "Capitalism and the Historians" published in 1954. Professor F. A. Hayek of the University of Chicago USA is the editor with contributions from Louis Hacker, W. H. Hutt and Bertrand de Jouvenel. The topic of discussion is specifically, the "legend of the deterioration of th eposition of the working classes in consequence to the rise of 'capitalism'", and generally, "the widespread aversion to 'capitalism'". On a larger scale, these essays examine what is "history", as apart from "political legend". Professor Ashton attacks a general pessismism and lack of economic sense in the commonly accepted views of the economic developments of the nineteenth century. He opposes the views of Sombart and Schumpeter which write history "as though it its function were simply to exhibit the gradualness of inevitability." Rather, Ashton maintains "that it is from the spontaneous actions and choices of ordinary people that progress springs." Louis M Hacker addresses the same themes as Ashton and discusses the present attitude of American historians toward capitalism. Hacker summarises, "When, therefore, historians learn to treat their materials more sensitively and make corrections on the counts indicated, the popularly accepted notions about profits as exploitation will undergo drastic revision." Bertrand de Jouvenel examines the treatment of capitalism by continental intellectuals. He explains that the modern intelligentsia occupies a similar position as the clerics of Medieval Times although their authority is undermined because they lack the responsibility of the clerics who were themselves part of the community. "The study of the past," writes de Jouvenel, "always bears the imprint of the present views." In the second part of this book, Ashton examines what happened to the standard of life of the British working classes in the late decades of the eighteenth and the early decades of the nineteenth. W H Hutt also examines the British factory system of this period. The report of the "Sadler's Commitee" in 1832 is analyzed. Although this examination and defence of "capitalism" made for extremely interesting reading, I was more impressed with the methods these historians used to extract their view of events and thereby, redefine common misconceptions of an historical period. If you are interested in the early development of the Industrial Revolution in Britain, or in history as a dynamic organism, this book will be interesting to you.

Nobel Prize-winning economist Friedrich Hayek wrote in the Preface to this 1954 collection, "The first three papers in this volume were originally presented to a gathering of an international group of economists, historians, and social philosophers who for some years have been meeting regularly to discuss the problems of the preservation of a free society against the totalitarian threat... It was ... suggested that this might be usefully combined with reprinting some earlier papers by members of the Society dealing with closely connected topics... I have tried, in an Introduction ... to explain the wider significance of the problem discussed in the earlier pages." (NOTE: Page numbers below refer to the 1967 184-page edition by the University of Chicago.)

Hayek observes, "The proletariat which capitalism can be said to have 'created' was thus not a proportion of the population which would have existed without it and which it had degraded to a lower level; it was an additional population which was enabled to grow up by the new opportunities for employment which capitalism provided." (Pg. 16) Concerning the conditions of industrial workers, he suggests that "While there is every evidence that great misery existed, there is none that it was greater than or even as great as it had been before." (Pg. 18)

One author points out that the "common charge of inhumanity" against the 19th century "would be an idle slander if it were not so gross." He notes that the 19th century introduced on a broad scale public health and public education, and made possible the "amazing climb of real wages in industrialized countries." (Pg. 64-65) He adds that the anticapitalism of the New Dealers is "political and moral; for certainly no serious case has been made out against capitalism as such." (Pg. 87)

Bertrand de Jouvenel argues that researchers using the comparative method might have found that "a massive influx into the towns, with the resultant squalor and pauperism, occurred as well in countries untouched by the Industrial Revolution, where they produced waves of beggars instead of underpaid workers." (Pg. 99)

T.S. Ashton (author of The Industrial Revolution, 1760-1830 (C Opus T Opus N)) comments approvingly on the 19th century's growth of trade unions, friendly societies, savings banks, popular newspapers, schools, and noncomformist chapels: "all give evidence of the existence of a large class raised well above the level of mere subsistence." (Pg. 154)

Another commentator observes that the famous/infamous Sadler Report was negatively reviewed by Friedrich Engels, as being "emphatically partisan, composed by strong enemies of the factory for party ends." (Pg. 160)

This challenging collection will be of great interest to defenders of the free market, or those wanting more information about this era.

Hayek's collection of essays is an interesting look at capitalism from the late 1800's onward. I enjoyed the writer's views of liberal "intellectuals" and their negative views and historical perspective of Europe and early America. A few of the writers talked about Marx and Engels and their remarkable views and propaganda of capitalists. In all, a short book and some high quality writers contributing to the history of capitalism.