Capitalism.
Publié le 10/05/2013
Extrait du document
«
Physiocracy is the term applied to a school of economic thought that suggested the existence of a natural order in economics, one that does not require direction from the state for people to be prosperous.
The leader of the physiocrats, the economist François Quesnay, set forth the basic principles in his Tableau économique (1758), in which he traced the flow of money and goods through the economy.
Simply put, this flow was seen to be both circular and self-sustaining.
More important, however,was that it rested on the division of society into three main classes: (1) The productive class was made up of those engaged in agriculture, fishing, and mining,representing one-half of the population.
(2) The proprietary class consisted of landed proprietors and those supported by them, which amounted to one-quarter of thepopulation.
(3) The artisan, or sterile, class, made up the rest of the population.
Quesnay's Tableau is significant because it expressed the belief that only the agricultural classes are capable of producing a surplus or net product, out of which the state either could find the capital to support an expansion of the flow of goods and money or could levy taxes to meet its needs.
Other activities, such asmanufacturing, were regarded as essentially sterile, because they did not produce new wealth but simply transformed or circulated the output of the productive class.
Itwas this aspect of physiocratic thought that was turned against mercantilism.
If industry did not create wealth, then it was futile for the state to try to enhance society'swealth by a detailed regulation and direction of economic activity.
B The Doctrine of Adam Smith
The ideas of Adam Smith represented more than just the first systematic treatise on economics; they were a frontal attack on the doctrines of mercantilism.
Like thephysiocrats, Smith tried to show the existence of a “natural” economic order, one that would function most efficiently if the state played a highly limited role.
Unlike thephysiocrats, however, Smith did not believe that industry was unproductive or that only the agricultural sector was capable of producing a surplus above thesubsistence needs of society.
Rather, Smith saw in the division of labor and the extension of markets almost limitless possibilities for society to expand its wealththrough manufacture and trade.
Thus, both the physiocrats and Smith contributed to the belief that the economic powers of governments should be limited and that there existed a natural order ofliberty applicable to the economy.
It was Smith, however, far more than the physiocrats, who opened the way for industrialization and the emergence of moderncapitalism in the 19th century.
VI THE RISE OF INDUSTRIALIZATION
The ideas of Smith and the physiocrats provided the ideological and intellectual background for the Industrial Revolution—the material side of the sweepingtransformations in society and the world that characterized the 19th century.
No precise date can be given for this “revolution”; it is generally conceded to have begunin the late 18th century.
The fundamental characteristic of the industrialization process was the introduction of mechanical power (originally steam) to replace human and animal power in theproduction of goods and services.
As the mechanization of production gained momentum in England and gradually spread to other parts of the world, severalfundamental changes occurred.
Production became more specialized and concentrated in larger units, called factories.
The artisans and small shops of the 18th centurydid not disappear, but they were relegated to the periphery of economic activity in the leading nations, especially in England, the United States, and Germany.
Themodern working class began to emerge; workers no longer owned their tools, they had little property, and generally they had to exchange their labor for a moneywage.
The application of mechanical power to production brought with it a great increase in worker efficiency, which made goods abundant and cheap.
Consequently,the real standard of living rose throughout much of the world during the 19th century.
The development of industrial capitalism had serious human costs.
The early days of the Industrial Revolution were marred by appalling conditions for large numbers ofworkers, especially in England.
Abusive child labor, long working hours, and dangerous and unhealthy workplaces were common.
These conditions led Karl Marx, whospent most of his adult life in England, to produce his massive indictment of the capitalistic system, Das Kapital (3 volumes, 1867-94).
Marx's work, which is the intellectual foundation for the kind of Communist economic systems used in the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), struck at the fundamental principle ofcapitalism—private ownership of the means of production.
Marx believed that land and capital should be owned collectively (that is, by society) and that the products ofthe system should be distributed according to need.
Capitalism was also beset by cycles of 'boom and bust,' periods of expansion and prosperity followed by economic collapse and waves of unemployment.
The classicaleconomists who refined the ideas of Adam Smith had no ready explanation for the ups and downs of economic life, being content to view such cycles as the inevitableprice that society had to pay for the material progress experienced under capitalism.
Marxian criticisms, along with frequent depressions in the major capitalist nations,helped establish vigorous trade-union movements that fought to raise wages, shorten working hours, and improve working conditions.
In the late 19th century, especially in the United States, the modern corporation, with its limited liability and immense financial power, began to emerge as the dominantform of business organization.
The tendency toward corporate control of manufacturing led to many attempts to create combines, monopolies, or trusts that couldcontrol an entire industry.
Eventually, the public outcry against such practices was great enough in the United States to lead Congress to pass antitrust legislation.
Thislegislation attempted to make the pursuit of monopoly by business illegal, using the power of the state to force at least a bare minimum of competition in industry andcommerce.
The antitrust laws never succeeded in restoring to industry the competition of many small businesses that Adam Smith had envisaged, but it did impede theworst tendencies toward creating monopolies and restraining trade.
Despite such difficulties, capitalism continued to expand and prosper almost without limit throughout the 19th century.
It was successful because it demonstrated anenormous ability to create new wealth and to raise the real standard of living for nearly everyone touched by it.
As the century closed, capitalism was the dominanteconomic and social system.
VII 20TH-CENTURY CAPITALISM
For most of the 20th century capitalism was buffeted by wars, revolution, and depression.
World War I brought revolution and a Marxist-based communism to Russia.The war also spawned the Nazi system in Germany, a malevolent mixture of capitalism and state socialism, brought together in a regime whose violence andexpansionism eventually pushed the world into another major conflict.
In the aftermath of World War II (1939-1945), Communist economic systems took hold in Chinaand Eastern Europe.
However, as the Cold War came to an end in the 1980s and the former Soviet-bloc nations turned to free enterprise (though with mixed success atfirst), China was the only major power to retain a Marxist regime.
Many of the developing nations, strongly influenced by Marxist ideas in the early postcolonial period,turned to a modified form of capitalism in their search for answers to economic problems.
In the industrial democracies of Western Europe and North America, the sharpest challenge to capitalism came in the 1930s.
The Great Depression was by far the mostsevere economic upheaval endured by modern capitalism since its beginnings in the 18th century.
Contrary to the logic of Marx's prophecy, however, Western nationsfailed to collapse into revolution.
Rather, in meeting the challenge of the Depression, these capitalist systems demonstrated remarkable abilities for survival andadaptability to change.
Democratic governments began to intervene in the economy to correct the worst abuses inherent in capitalism..
»
↓↓↓ APERÇU DU DOCUMENT ↓↓↓