Industrial revolution in Britain

>>1622239
>european
>island
>steppe.not found

>>1622244
Why does it being an island play a role?

>>1622260
horse archers cant swim that far

>>1622275
what are you even talking about?

>>1622239
Because of this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vEOtxH5V2w

File: bnsdrur.png (97KB, 418x411px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 418x411px

>>1622239
Accumulation of capital due to extensive trading + protestant ethics.

>>1622338
>fat virgin with anime figures on the desk
>selious histolian

File: British.coalfields.19th.century.jpg (358KB, 1088x2017px) Image search: [Google]

358KB, 1088x2017px

(1/2)Here's a typical answer:

The enclosure movement created an Agricultural Proletariat that sold their labour for wages. The Landlords benefited immensely from this because they could use their income to purchase goods from merchants, and pay taxes. There were very few powerful landlords compared to France, and they were more powerful. England traded a great deal with Holland and the rest of Europe. The wealthy merchants earned money from trade, the workers from selling their labour, and the landlords from sitting on their land. Since the workers had a detachment from the land in the 18th century, wealth and value was assumed to reside in capital accumulation (production) -- Classical Economics. In France, where agriculture was still predominant, the Physiocrats argued that all wealth and value flows from the land & agriculture ("productive art") into the "sterile art" of production.

The belief that production and capital accumulation was the source of wealth was argued by Smith. His followers (that often misunderstood him) would, decades after WoN, argue passionately for policies that were pro business. Smith's 18th century production was child's play compared to 19th century production. The British emulated the Romans in their engineering ambitions, the pump allowed the miners to mine deeper than before. The Cornish mines had immense amounts of tin and other metals, the north was abundant in coal.

As the country began to industrialize in the turn of the 19th century, the tension between the capitalists and the landlords threatened to halt British industrial ambitions entirely. Ricardo raised a criticism that directly contradicted the French Physiocrats and Protectionists. Given that farmland has diminishing marginal returns, that is, the good farmland that produces a high yield is bought first, and then the lower yield farmland after, and so on, the landlords profit from constricting the supply of crops and causing inflation.

>>1622329
why britain became anglo-english-hegemony. are you a fucking retard?

File: Adolf_Friedrich_Erdmann_von_Menzel_021.jpg (172KB, 800x500px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 800x500px

>>1622385
(2/2)

Thus, argued Ricardo, the Landlords benefit at the expense of everyone else, whereas the Capital accumulation of the industrialists benefited society. The French were disgusted by such ideas as "free trade", dismissing thinkers from 18th century Turgot, who had argued that France become more like Holland and England, to 19th century Bastiat who wrote a series of annihilating satires (one of the most famous: http://bastiat.org/en/petition.html) against French economic policy.

The British eventually dropped protectionism of the landlords by repealing the Corn Laws. The market was thrown open and supremacy of it was seized by the capitalists. The abundance of coal increased production immensely, which raised wages, and then demand for the goods from production, etc. This positive feedback carried England into stratospheric levels compared to France which had languished since Blenheim, or at least, had always been the beta to the British alpha. Remember that Britain industrialized BEFORE it became a colonial supremacy. The latter arises from the former.

The Empire provided a market in the late 19th century, though the British did not set up an intra-Empire protectionist bloc, I don't think until the 1920s. Britain had a trade surplus, and due to capitalism, abundance of coal, and immense confidence in themselves, they dominated the world by the end of the 19th century. Of course once they had saturated the domestic market for investment the ponzi exploded into Africa, culminating in WW1. Some draw parallels between the British Empire in the 1890s, and the Roman Empire during their colonial inflation. I think this is mostly pottery and does not survive intense scrutiny.

This is only a skim over the economic context. The political is just as interesting: Civil war, 1832 reforms, corn laws, etc.

File: europeclimates.jpg (135KB, 870x1137px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 870x1137px

exposure to mediterranean trade and tech + good climate + defensible island

>>1622239
a openness to innovation (at least in terms of trade and machinery if not politics)

handily located resources, notably coal iron and tin.

cheap labour partly as a result of the agricultural revolution and subsequent reduction in the number of workers in agriculture.

the development of banking and joint stock companies.

all contributed to making britain the wellspring of the industrial revolution

>>1622339

What socio-economical system? He didn't really advocate the implementation of any specific economic policies, just tried to explain the rise of capitalism from a different historical perspective than Marx.

>>1622447
t. doggerland

>>1622239
>For so long
By the second half of the 19th Century both the US and Germany were BTFOing it in industrial terms.

>>1622510
only by the last quarter of the 19th century, mostly as a result of having piggy backed off of the british innovations (wholesale patent infringement in the US being a particular issue) they started later so had more advanced machinery while the british manufacturers were often reluctant to accept the capital cost of replacing their machinery with newer more efficient machinery

>>1622239
because they were the first to make the machines which did it

File: image.gif (2MB, 527x297px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 527x297px

>>1622417
>We are suffering from the ruinous competition of a rival who apparently works under conditions so far superior to our own for the production of light that he is flooding the domestic market with it at an incredibly low price; for the moment he appears, our sales cease, all the consumers turn to him, and a branch of French industry whose ramifications are innumerable is all at once reduced to complete stagnation. This rival, which is none other than the sun, is waging war on us so mercilessly we suspect he is being stirred up against us by perfidious Albion (excellent diplomacy nowadays!), particularly because he has for that haughty island a respect that he does not show for us.