Capitalism and the Historians [Paperback]

F. A. Hayek (Editor)

Book Description

ISBN-10: 0226320723 | ISBN-13: 978-0226320724 | Publication Date: April 15, 1963 | Edition: 1ST

The views generally held about the rise of the factory system in Britain derive from highly distorted accounts of the social consequences of that system—so say the distinguished economic historians whose papers make up this book. The authors offer documentary evidence to support their conclusion that under capitalism the workers, despite long hours and other hardships of factory life, were better off financially, had more opportunities, and led a better life than had been the case before the Industrial Revolution.

Editorial Reviews

About the Author

F. A. Hayek (1899-1992), recipient of the Medal of Freedom in 1991 and co-winner of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics in 1974, was a pioneer in monetary theory and a leading proponent of classical liberalism  in the twentieth century. He taught at the University of London, the University of Chicago, and the University of Freiburg.

 

Product Details

• Paperback: 196 pages
• Publisher: University Of Chicago Press; 1ST edition (April 15, 1963)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0226320723
• ISBN-13: 978-0226320724
• Product Dimensions: 7.9 x 5.2 x 0.5 inches
• Shipping Weight: 8.8 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.3 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (6 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #726,404 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

18 of 21 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars what is history, January 1, 2002

By 

"katja_r" - See all my reviews

This review is from: 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.

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Not a life changing book but interesting views, November 15, 2011

By 

Robert Kirk (Reno, Nv) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Capitalism and the Historians (Paperback)

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.

2 of 4 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars Disappointment, May 9, 2010

By 

B (New Orleans) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Capitalism and the Historians (Paperback)

I sympathize with Hayek's ideas and enjoy his books. As such, I expected a convincing, thorough, and aggressive set of arguments. Alas, my hopes were dashed.

The book opens with an introduction by Hayek. This section basically describes the book's structure and content. Hayek also briefly offers some general remarks on the topic. I understand the role of an introduction, but anyone could have written Hayek's. No offense, but this does not add much to the book, besides allowing the publisher to stamp his name on the cover.

Ashton's two essays were okay, but do not add much to the literature and were too timid to differentiate himself from the opposing side of the debate. Hacker's essay, on the other hand, offers nothing of value. He lacks a unifying theme and focuses too much on other writers instead of offering his own thoughts. My suspicion is that he had none and simply had to fill in the space to compensate for his own inadequacy on this subject. He also jumps around too much and seems distracted. Jouvenel is more capable than Hacker, but his essay is too speculative and he makes a few questionable claims.

Hutt's famous essay represents the best of the lot, but it isn't quite enough to save this book. He points out some inconsistencies from his opponents, some quite serious, but I wish he offered a little more documentation. As a critic, the burden of proof rests on him, and in a few cases he doesn't deliver or give a satisfying answer; poking holes in another's argument doesn't necessarily prove yours. Overall, though, he presents an interesting paper and it should be read.

One advertiser claims that "subsequent research by later scholars comfirmed the analysis you will find in these pages." I would advise you to find those books instead, and skip this one.