Download SC/NATS 1840 – Lecture 8 - Colonial Expansion and Resource

SC/NATS 1840 – Lecture 8 - Colonial Expansion and Resource Exploitation
Political Underpinnings of the Industrial Revolution
- History courses frequently portray the Industrial Revolution as a technological
and management based change, new technologies, and new ways of organizing
people, led to an explosion in production and consumption
- In the period leading up to the Industrial revolution, populations increased and
production increased as well, both increasing the burden on the environment
- Although the organization of labour and the introduction of new technologies
were key developments, the existing political and economic forces were also
important, as they shaped the basic attitude towards the environment, treating
natural objects as resources for our exploitation
- Naylor’s account traces some of the complex interdependencies between major
powers and their use of colonial resources to gain power, and the shift from
mercantilism to capitalism
- Mercantilism is an economic system based on the idea that nations should
maintain a positive balance of trade by having more exports than imports, and that
they should hoard specie (gold or silver)
Modes of Production before the Industrial Revolution
- There were three dominant modes of production before the Industrial Revolution:
o Artisanal production: highly skilled artisans or craftsmen produced goods,
they trained apprentices, there was little division of labour, and most
goods were produced from start to finish by one individual
o Mass-production: there was limited mass-production in the pre-Industrial
Revolution period, in the putting-out system. Groups of workers would
perform one operation on a product, moving it on to the next group to
perform the next operation. This work was done in small buildings in rural
areas, and merchants controlled production
o Factory production: when large numbers of labourers were needed and
could be gathered at one particular place, factory production was possible,
but this was limited to a few fields (ship production, mining)
- The Industrial Revolution saw the dominance of the last two modes of production,
deskilling the worker, lowering wages, and producing goods more cheaply and on
a larger scale than ever before
- As Naylor points out, workers who were displaced from agriculture to work in
urban areas saw the value of their income decrease as goods that were previously
produced at home had to be purchased on the market
- The first major product to be incorporated into the new modes of production was
cotton, made from a tropical plant into cheap clothing
- Cotton textiles were important to the early stages of the industrial revolution as
cotton could be traded for slaves used on sugar plantations
- Displaced agricultural laborers in the UK were too poor to provide a market for
the textiles that fueled the industrial revolution, so colonial markets became
crucial
- Thus, colonial acquisitions were not only important as they represented resources
for the home country, but they also provided markets for the consumption of the
-
-
-
products made from those resources, products that were frequently too expensive
for the urban poor in the home country to purchase
As the colonial powers, based in land poor Europe, needed their land for food,
colonial acquisitions were well suited to the growing of cotton, which was landintensive
Capitalists at the start of the Industrial Revolution invested in land, peerages and
overseas ventures, new ventures like mills and factories were invested in by a new
entrepreneurial class
Capital requirements for factories were initially low, so small businessmen could
invest, but their margins were tight, and as a result they demanded savings from
labor, and wages lowered, the working day extended, and child labor was used
Competition for Empire in the 19th Century
- Naylor argues that the Nineteenth century saw a competition, primarily between
the English and the French, for control of global trade and resources
- Importantly, countries began to realize that disrupting trade was as important as
military victory, as military strength relied on economic power
- So, for example, he points out that the French managed to seal off Europe from
British trade, but Britain managed, through the use of its powerful navy, to secure
colonial markets in compensation
- In the case of India, British acquisitions allowed them to tax the local population,
and use the funds for purchases of Chinese silks, cottons and teas, thus
eliminating the need to use specie (silver and gold)
- This shift from West Indies (sugar and slaves) to East Indies (India) marked
transfer from mercantilism to industrial capitalism
- This transfer destroyed the economies of the West Indies, and suggests that the
abandonment of slavery was less a social or moral issue than one of economics
- In 1813, after war with France, UK flooded India with cheap cotton exports, India
went from luxury fabric exporter to major market for cheap fabric (1873 – 60% of
UK cotton exports to India)
- Mercantilism relied on the control of Spanish silver through dominance of luxury
trade, therefore luxury items (furs, sugar, spices, Indian cotton)
- Introduction of sugar beet in Europe contributed to the abandonment of the West
Indies and their poor, predominantly African slave populations
- With the Industrial Revolution markets became important as productivity
increased, India and North America became important to the UK as they
represented larger markets, and political decisions were shaped accordingly
- Over 18th century UK moved to gold standard from the silver standard, as the UK
gained Brazillian gold from Portugal, and paper money was used as gold was too
valuable to circulate
- In 1816 gold standard for paper money announced, import and export controls on
gold lifted
- The shift from silver to gold was thus not a practical one, nor was it one based on
a preference for paper money, instead it was a political change based on imperial
trade possibilities
-
-
London became the centre of a financial empire in European commerce, offering
loans to government and business through merchant banks
Naylor thus suggests that it is not ownership that matters the most, but instead
who controls the flow of capital, thus we should be wary of accounts that suggest
that resource ownership is the key to understanding the impact of capitalism on
the environment
With the development of colonial markets and colonial resources, trade policy
changed to favor importing of raw materials and exporting of manufactured goods
Tariffs were reduced and trade liberalized to increase trade with UK, as trade, not
specie, was valued, this was the core of the shift from mercantilism to capitalism