Capitalism and the Historians (Paperback)

~ F. A. Hayek (Editor) "Political opinion and views about historical events ever have been and always must be closely connected..." (more)
Key Phrases: anticapitalist bias, secular intelligentsia, social devices, New York, United States, Civil War (more...)

Editorial Reviews

Review

"A book that will disturb the sleep of a good many scholars" - Max Eastman --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

Product Description

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.

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: 3.7 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (3 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #362,667 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

16 of 19 people found the following review helpful:

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

By	"katja_r" (munich, germany) - See all my reviews

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:

2.0 out of 5 stars Hayek Flunks History (Again), April 27, 2009

By	Carl Stoll (Washington DC) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

This review is from: Capitalism and the Historians: Essays by T.S. Ashton [and others] (Routledge Library Editions-Economics, 28) (Hardcover)

Friedrich Hayek is the patron saint of the free-market crowd. In 1944 he caused a sensation with his epochal book The Road to Serfdom (which I criticize elsewhere (in Carl Stoll: Why Hayek Sucks, unpublished manuscript, 2007.), denouncing the horrors of collectivism and purporting to prove that central planning, and indeed any purposeful state intervention in the economy, inevitably lead to the establishment of tyranny. In the following decades more and more people rallied to his slogan, and in the 1980s the interventionist Keynesian doctrine was officially discarded by mainstream economic policy-makers. Since then the free market has reigned supreme in academic circles.

Far from damning Hayek unconditionally, I sympathize with much of his basic reasoning. Moreover he wrote beautifully. Nonetheless I believe most of his conclusions are wrong. In this brief note I will mention but one of these claims, one that has fared badly. I cite:

"Few men will deny that our views about the goodness or badness of different institutions are largely determined by what we believe to have been their effects in the past. ... Yet the historical beliefs which guide us in the present are not always in accord with the facts; sometimes they are even the effects rather than the cause of political beliefs. Historical myths have perhaps played as great a role in shaping public opinion as historical fact."(F.A. Hayek: Introduction)

After 5 pages in this vein, Hayek finally gets to the point:

"There is, however, one supreme myth which more than any other has served to discredit the economic system to which we owe our present-day civilizations and to the examination of which this volume is devoted. ...who has not heard of the "horrors of early capitalism" and gained the impression that the advent of this system brought untold new suffering to large classes who before were tolerably content and comfortable? ... The widespread emotional aversion to "capitalism" is closely connected with this belief ... That this [i.e., the horrors of early capitalism] was the case was at one time indeed widely taught by economic historians. A more careful examination of the facts has, however, led to a thorough refutation of this belief. ... The actual history of the connection between capitalism and the rise of the proletariat is almost the opposite of that which these theories of the expropriation of the masses suggest."

Unfortunately for Hayek, it has been conclusively proven that ALL THIS IS JUST A LOAD OF CODSWALLOP. At the time I write (2007) there can be no doubt that the English Industrial Revolution did indeed bring about misery on a colossal scale. I need cite but a single fact to bring all of Hayek's clever phrases tumbling down like house of cards: between the period 1825-1849 and the period 1850-1875 -- in the space of one generation -- THE AVERAGE HEIGHT OF GROWN ENGLISHMEN FELL BY ONE WHOLE INCH. This phenomenon, discovered by measuring skeletons in English graveyards, has no parallel on the European continent for that period. (R.W. Fogel: The Escape from Hunger and Premature Death, 1700-2100, Cambridge University Press 2004, Table 1.4 (p. 13), citing data from R. Floud, K.W. Wachter & A. Gregory: Height, health and history: Nutritional status in the United Kingdom, 1750-1908, Cambridge University Press 1990.)

Any commentary of this finding and of its implications for the standard of living in England in the mid-19th century would be superfluous.

But there is more. Despite the "careful examination of the facts" allegedly conducted by the contributors to Hayek's Capitalism and the Historians, certain details seem to have escaped these worthies. Such as the fact that in 1840 great numbers of English children were parentless, homeless, starving and freezing.(Michael Perelman: The Perverse Economy. The Impact of Markets on People and the Environment, Palgrave Macmillan, New York 2003, p. 12, citing Tobias, J. J.: Crime and industrial society in the 19th century, Batsford, London 1967, p. 86. [Library of Congress call number: HV6944 .T6])

According to the thesis they espouse, namely that the industrial revolution did not depress but instead promptly raised the standard of living of the masses, such suffering must have been even more widespread in England in the 18th century. I challenge anyone to produce historical evidence in support of such a claim.

I close by quoting again, this time in an ironical tone, from the opening passage of Hayek's introduction:

"[T]he historical beliefs which guide us in the present are not always in accord with the facts; SOMETIMES THEY ARE EVEN THE EFFECTS RATHER THAN THE CAUSE OF POLITICAL BELIEFS." [my stress]

De te fabula narratur.

Although I disagree with Hayek, I respect him. I am deeply troubled by the thought that a man of such noble ideals appears to have been an accomplice to such a gross misrepresentation of history.

10 of 26 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Capitalism not as a "dirty word.", September 5, 2000

By	JB (One Cave in the Afghanistan Rain Forest) - See all my reviews

Hayek's books are always not easy ones. This book, not unlike other ones, is hard to understand.

If you think the word "capitalism" is a dirty word. Buy this book or Milton Friedman's "Capitalism and Freedom." You will learn much about capitalism and its meanings.

This is a great investigation of the history of business. It teaches you to think differently. You'll become a better historian.