Advertisement

Hardware: the Economy, Society and Ideologies of Production

  • Michael Spindler

Abstract

In the United States of the latter half of the nineteenth century the economy had not yet reached that stage of saturation by ‘the main interest’, the imperative of selling. The problems facing the capitalists were centred on the first phase, the phase of production. Until the Civil War America had seen little industrial development except in some northeastern towns and its economy was predominantly a rural and handicraft one. But the victory of the North in 1865 meant that the northern industrial and business interests, long held in check by a coalition of the agrarian South and Northwest, were free to develop the nation as they wished. With the compliance of a succession of federal governments sympathetic to the goal of economic expansion these interests began to exploit the resources of the American subcontinent and to take the economy through the process of rapid capital accumulation. Industrialisation took place on a massive scale.

Keywords

Nineteenth Century Social Character Political Equality Pure Competition Protestant Ethic 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    Charles H. Hession and Hyman Sardy, Ascent to Affluence: A History of American Economic Development (Boston: 1969) pp. 420, 424.Google Scholar
  2. 3.
    Karl Marx, Capital (London: 1971) II, p. 255.Google Scholar
  3. 4.
    Simon Kuznets, “The Proportion of Capital Formation to National Product”, American Economic Review, 42 (1952) 507–26,Google Scholar
  4. Table I; Simon Kuznets, Capital in the American Economy: Its Formation and Financing (Princeton: 1961) pp. 408, 401. Net balance of foreign capital inflow is the amount of capital flowing into the country from abroad minus the amount of capital flowing out of the country.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hession and Sardy, op. cit., p. 416; Kuznets, Capital in the American Economy, p. 64.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    R. B. Nye and J. E. Morpurgo, The Growth of the USA (Harmondsworth: 1970) p. 578;Google Scholar
  7. Stewart H. Holbrook, The Age of the Moguls (New York: 1953) pp. 7, 301, 360.Google Scholar
  8. See also Matthew Josephson, The Robber Barons: The Great American Capitalists 1861–1901 (London: 1962).Google Scholar
  9. 7.
    Hession and Sardy, op. cit., p. 469.Google Scholar
  10. 8.
    Nye and Morpurgo, op. cit., p. 631.Google Scholar
  11. 9.
    See Maurice Dobb, Studies in the Development of Capitalism (London: 1946), p. 290.Google Scholar
  12. 11.
    Hession and Sardy, op. cit., p. 533.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    R. H. Tawney, Religion and the Rise of Capitalism (Harmondsworth: 1938) p. 249.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, trans. Talcott Parsons (London, 1971) p. 55;Google Scholar
  15. see Christopher Hill, ‘Protestantism and the Rise of Capitalism’, in Capitalism and the Reformation, edited by M.J. Kitch (London: 1967) pp. 3–8.Google Scholar
  16. 15.
    See John Winthrop, ‘Reasons for Forsaking England’ (1629) and the editor’s note ‘Genesis of the Bay Colony’ in The Puritan Tradition in America 1620–1730, edited by Alden T. Vaughan (New York: 1972) pp. 25–35, 54.Google Scholar
  17. 16.
    Three central doctrines of Calvinism — the inherent sinfulness of the world and worldly possessions, predestination, and the calling — supplied the basis of the Protestant ethic and provided the bridges by which religious belief was linked to early capitalist practice. The first condemned ‘covetousness’ and urged the Puritan to deny himself the physical allurements of play and entertainment and to check sensual pleasure; the second led to the search for signs of one’s election in one’s daily activity; and the doctrine of the calling led ‘to the position that not withdrawal from the world, but the conscientious discharge of the duties of business, is among the loftiest of religious and moral virtues’. Combined together they inculcated a ‘worldly asceticism’ in which hard work, thrift, self-discipline and rational foresight were heavily emphasised. Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, p. 119 and passim. See also Tawney, op. cit., p. 239, Vaughan, op. cit., pp. 131, 133, 311, and Kitch, op. cit., pp. 156–8.Google Scholar
  18. Three central doctrines of Calvinism — the inherent sinfulness of the world and worldly possessions, predestination, and the calling — supplied the basis of the Protestant ethic and provided the bridges by which religious belief was linked to early capitalist practice. The first condemned ‘covetousness’ and urged the Puritan to deny himself the physical allurements of play and entertainment and to check sensual pleasure; the second led to the search for signs of one’s election in one’s daily activity; and the doctrine of the calling led ‘to the position that not withdrawal from the world, but the conscientious discharge of the duties of business, is among the loftiest of religious and moral virtues’. Combined together they inculcated a ‘worldly asceticism’ in which hard work, thrift, self-discipline and rational foresight were heavily emphasised. Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, p. 119 and passim. See also Tawney, op. cit., p. 239, Vaughan, op. cit., pp. 131, 133, 311, and Kitch, op. cit., pp. 156–8.Google Scholar
  19. Three central doctrines of Calvinism — the inherent sinfulness of the world and worldly possessions, predestination, and the calling — supplied the basis of the Protestant ethic and provided the bridges by which religious belief was linked to early capitalist practice. The first condemned ‘covetousness’ and urged the Puritan to deny himself the physical allurements of play and entertainment and to check sensual pleasure; the second led to the search for signs of one’s election in one’s daily activity; and the doctrine of the calling led ‘to the position that not withdrawal from the world, but the conscientious discharge of the duties of business, is among the loftiest of religious and moral virtues’. Combined together they inculcated a ‘worldly asceticism’ in which hard work, thrift, self-discipline and rational foresight were heavily emphasised. Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, p. 119 and passim. See also Tawney, op. cit., p. 239, Vaughan, op. cit., pp. 131, 133, 311, and Kitch, op. cit., pp. 156–8.Google Scholar
  20. 17.
    Hector St John de Crevecoeur, Letters from an American Farmer (1782, London: 1912), pp. 59, 220; Benjamin Franklin, The Instructor; or Young Mans Best Companion (1748), collected in The Autobiography and Other Writings, edited by L. Jesse Lemisch (New York: 1961) pp. 187, 186; Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, translated by George Lawrence and edited by J. P. Mayer and Max Lerner (London: 1968) II, p. 711. Not everybody accepted the strictures of the Protestant ethic without demur. In the 1840s Thoreau, in Walden, rejected the notion of labour as a calling and praised idleness as at times ‘the most attractive and productive industry’.Google Scholar
  21. Benjamin Franklin, The Instructor; or Young Mans Best Companion (1748), collected in The Autobiography and Other Writings, edited by L. Jesse Lemisch (New York: 1961) pp. 187, 186;Google Scholar
  22. Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, translated by George Lawrence and edited by J. P. Mayer and Max Lerner (London: 1968) II, p. 711. Not everybody accepted the strictures of the Protestant ethic without demur. In the 1840s Thoreau, in Walden, rejected the notion of labour as a calling and praised idleness as at times ‘the most attractive and productive industry’.Google Scholar
  23. 19.
    Tocqueville, Democracy, II, p. 692; James Bryce, The American Commonwealth (1888, revised edition New York: 1911) II, p. 814;Google Scholar
  24. Simon Kuznets, ‘The Proportion of Capital Formation to National Product’, American Economic Review, 42 (1952) 507–26.Google Scholar
  25. 23.
    Charles Beard in An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States (New York: 1935) attacked the notion of the homogeneous middle-class character of American society in the late eighteenth century, but Robert E. Brown in Charles Beard and the Constitution (Princeton: 1956) effectively demolished Beard’s arguments and established that in 1787 American society was predominantly middle-class with few extremes of wealth and poverty and most men owning property.Google Scholar
  26. 25.
    Jefferson, ‘Notes on the State of Virginia’, reprinted in The Portable Thomas Jefferson edited by Merrill D. Peterson (Harmondsworth: 1977) p. 217; Crèvecoeur, Letters, p. 44.Google Scholar
  27. 30.
    Yehoshua Arieli, Individualism and Nationalism in American Ideology (Cambridge, Mass: 1964) p. 132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 31.
    Abraham Lincoln, Collected Works, edited by Roy P. Basler (New Brunswick, New Jersey: 1953) VII, p. 23.Google Scholar
  29. 33.
    ‘American social development has been continually beginning over again on the frontier. This perennial rebirth, this fluidity of American life, this expansion westward with its new opportunities, its continuous touch with the simplicity of primitive society furnish the forces dominating American character.’ Frederick Jackson Turner, The Frontier in American History (1920, reprinted New York: 1962) pp. 2, 30; Bryce, American Commonwealth, II, pp. 590–1.Google Scholar
  30. 34.
    T. B. Bottomore, Classes in Modern Society (London: 1965) p. 42.Google Scholar
  31. 35.
    Bryce, op. cit. II, pp. 474–5.Google Scholar
  32. 36.
    Bryce, op. cit, I, p. 642; Morton and Lucia White, The Intellectual Versusthe City: From Thomas Jefferson to Frank Lloyd Wright (New York: 1977) p. 149. See Holbrook, Age of the Moguls, and Josephson, Robber Barons for accounts of the entrepreneurs’ manipulation of the press and the political machines.Google Scholar
  33. Morton and Lucia White, The Intellectual Versusthe City: From Thomas Jefferson to Frank Lloyd Wright (New York: 1977) p. 149. See Holbrook, Age of the Moguls, and Josephson, Robber Barons for accounts of the entrepreneurs’ manipulation of the press and the political machines.Google Scholar
  34. 37.
    Bryce, op. cit, II, pp. 811–12;Google Scholar
  35. Gabriel Kolko, Wealth and Power in America (New York: 1962) p. 14; commentator quoted by Kolko, p. 99.Google Scholar
  36. 40.
    Andrew Carnegie, ‘Wealth’, North American Review (June 1889), reprinted in Democracy and the Gospel of Wealth, edited by Gail Kennedy (Boston: 1949) p. 1; William Graham Sumner, quoted by Richard Hofstadter, Social Darwinism in American Thought (revised edition, Boston: 1955) p. 51.Google Scholar
  37. Richard Hofstadter, Social Darwinism in American Thought (revised edition, Boston: 1955) p. 51.Google Scholar
  38. 41.
    Hofstadter, op. cit., pp. 201–4.Google Scholar
  39. 42.
    Weber, Protestant Ethic, p. 117; Thoreau, Walden and Civil Disobedience (New York: 1960) p. 148; Franklin, Autobiography, p. 94; Emerson, ‘Self-Reliance’, in Selected Writings, edited by Brooks Atkinson (New York: 1940) p. 148.Google Scholar
  40. Emerson, ‘Self-Reliance’, in Selected Writings, edited by Brooks Atkinson (New York: 1940) p. 148.Google Scholar
  41. 43.
    David Riesman, Nathan Glazer and Reuel Denny, The Lonely Crowd (abridged edition, New Haven: 1961) pp. 14, 15, 111–12.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Michael Spindler 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Spindler

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations