{"title":"<i>Capitalism: The Story Behind the Word</i> by Michael Sonenscher","authors":"Jonathan J. Liebowitz","doi":"10.1162/jinh_r_01989","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Sonenscher has written a short (174 pages of text), dense, and provocative book on the history of capitalism, or, more precisely, the idea of capitalism. Positioned as an intellectual historian, the author seeks to define capitalism, or to elucidate “the story behind the word,” as his subtitle puts it. He traces the word’s origins and its evolution into its widely accepted meaning in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. He contextualizes it within related concepts, discusses what he sees as the problem of capitalism—inequality—and assesses the contributions of period thinkers to an understanding of capitalism and to a solution to the problem of inequality.Sonenscher begins by showing that before the term capitalism was first used in the mid-nineteenth century, the French term capitaliste had a history going back well into the eighteenth century when it referred to those who financed wars by lending to the states that fought them. Capitalism acquired its “apocalyptic aura” when it was associated with the concepts of “commercial society” and the “division of labor” (xv). The book is devoted to explicating these terms, how they are problematic, and how various thinkers sought to solve the resulting problems.The book is divided into two parts, “Problems” and “Solutions.” The first describes the development of the idea of capitalism and relates it to other political concepts. Sonenscher distinguishes between capitalism on the one hand and commercial society and the division of labor on the other. His analysis is political, and he regards these institutions as problematic because they lead to inequality. Capitalism is a system of property ownership, and arrangements other than private ownership of capital are readily conceivable. Commercial society, on the other hand, arises from humans’ propensity to exchange, and it is hard to imagine a world without that and its concomitant, the division of labor. The potential for commercial society or capitalism to act as economic engines producing growth is not discussed.1Subsequently, the book navigates the course of capitalism’s evolution during the early nineteenth century. This transformation by continental thinkers developed capitalism from an idea mostly involving international economics based on war and debt into a national one. In the years leading up to the Revolution of 1848, Alphonse de Lamartine and Louis Blanc clarified the debate over capitalism by revealing that there were really two problems, which required two solutions: “the problem of … the ownership of capital” and “the problem of the division of labour and markets” (73).In the second part, Sonenscher discusses the solutions to the problem of inequality. Karl Marx’s communism, a “synthesis of French legal thought and German theology,” was based on a “negative community of goods” in which property could be used but not individually appropriated (78, 87). The many followers of Adam Smith struggled to reconcile the sympathy or virtue of his moral philosophy with the self-interest or expediency of his economics. Other philosophers envisioned a role for the state in mitigating the inequalities of capitalism without abolishing it. Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, for instance, thought that public administration could serve as “a bridge and a buffer between civil society and the state” (140). David Ricardo’s comparative advantage did not only produce benefits, it resulted in unequal returns to different producers and disadvantaged those turning out basic products. The resulting inequality could, however, be mitigated by adept monetary and fiscal policies. Finally, legal theorist Lorenz von Stein found a solution wherein administrative principles applied to groups could foster “real social cohesion” (157).After examining the dualities in the thought of these late eighteenth and early nineteenth century thinkers, Sonenscher returns to the distinction between capitalism and commercial society. He encourages a focus on the latter because, in its complexity and belief that “individuals are radically dependent upon one another,” it opens up many possibilities for what society might become (169).","PeriodicalId":46755,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interdisciplinary History","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Interdisciplinary History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/jinh_r_01989","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Sonenscher has written a short (174 pages of text), dense, and provocative book on the history of capitalism, or, more precisely, the idea of capitalism. Positioned as an intellectual historian, the author seeks to define capitalism, or to elucidate “the story behind the word,” as his subtitle puts it. He traces the word’s origins and its evolution into its widely accepted meaning in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. He contextualizes it within related concepts, discusses what he sees as the problem of capitalism—inequality—and assesses the contributions of period thinkers to an understanding of capitalism and to a solution to the problem of inequality.Sonenscher begins by showing that before the term capitalism was first used in the mid-nineteenth century, the French term capitaliste had a history going back well into the eighteenth century when it referred to those who financed wars by lending to the states that fought them. Capitalism acquired its “apocalyptic aura” when it was associated with the concepts of “commercial society” and the “division of labor” (xv). The book is devoted to explicating these terms, how they are problematic, and how various thinkers sought to solve the resulting problems.The book is divided into two parts, “Problems” and “Solutions.” The first describes the development of the idea of capitalism and relates it to other political concepts. Sonenscher distinguishes between capitalism on the one hand and commercial society and the division of labor on the other. His analysis is political, and he regards these institutions as problematic because they lead to inequality. Capitalism is a system of property ownership, and arrangements other than private ownership of capital are readily conceivable. Commercial society, on the other hand, arises from humans’ propensity to exchange, and it is hard to imagine a world without that and its concomitant, the division of labor. The potential for commercial society or capitalism to act as economic engines producing growth is not discussed.1Subsequently, the book navigates the course of capitalism’s evolution during the early nineteenth century. This transformation by continental thinkers developed capitalism from an idea mostly involving international economics based on war and debt into a national one. In the years leading up to the Revolution of 1848, Alphonse de Lamartine and Louis Blanc clarified the debate over capitalism by revealing that there were really two problems, which required two solutions: “the problem of … the ownership of capital” and “the problem of the division of labour and markets” (73).In the second part, Sonenscher discusses the solutions to the problem of inequality. Karl Marx’s communism, a “synthesis of French legal thought and German theology,” was based on a “negative community of goods” in which property could be used but not individually appropriated (78, 87). The many followers of Adam Smith struggled to reconcile the sympathy or virtue of his moral philosophy with the self-interest or expediency of his economics. Other philosophers envisioned a role for the state in mitigating the inequalities of capitalism without abolishing it. Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, for instance, thought that public administration could serve as “a bridge and a buffer between civil society and the state” (140). David Ricardo’s comparative advantage did not only produce benefits, it resulted in unequal returns to different producers and disadvantaged those turning out basic products. The resulting inequality could, however, be mitigated by adept monetary and fiscal policies. Finally, legal theorist Lorenz von Stein found a solution wherein administrative principles applied to groups could foster “real social cohesion” (157).After examining the dualities in the thought of these late eighteenth and early nineteenth century thinkers, Sonenscher returns to the distinction between capitalism and commercial society. He encourages a focus on the latter because, in its complexity and belief that “individuals are radically dependent upon one another,” it opens up many possibilities for what society might become (169).
索南舍尔写了一本篇幅短小(174页)、内容密集、颇具煽动性的关于资本主义历史的书,或者更准确地说,是关于资本主义思想的书。作为一名知识分子历史学家,作者试图定义资本主义,或者像副标题所说的那样,阐明“这个词背后的故事”。他追溯了这个词的起源,以及它在18世纪和19世纪初被广泛接受的意义的演变。他将其置于相关概念的背景中,讨论了他所认为的资本主义问题——不平等——并评估了时代思想家对理解资本主义和解决不平等问题的贡献。索南舍尔首先指出,在19世纪中叶资本主义一词首次被使用之前,法语中资本主义一词的历史可以追溯到18世纪,当时它指的是那些通过向参战国提供贷款来资助战争的人。当资本主义与“商业社会”和“劳动分工”的概念联系在一起时,它获得了“世界末日的光环”(xv)。这本书致力于解释这些术语,它们是如何产生问题的,以及不同的思想家如何寻求解决由此产生的问题。这本书分为“问题”和“解决方案”两部分。第一部分描述了资本主义思想的发展,并将其与其他政治概念联系起来。Sonenscher区分了资本主义和商业社会以及劳动分工。他的分析是政治性的,他认为这些制度是有问题的,因为它们导致了不平等。资本主义是一种财产所有权制度,除了资本私有制之外的其他安排是很容易想象的。另一方面,商业社会产生于人类对交换的倾向,很难想象一个没有交换及其伴生的劳动分工的世界。没有讨论商业社会或资本主义作为经济引擎产生增长的潜力。随后,本书引导了资本主义在19世纪早期的演变过程。欧洲大陆思想家的这种转变,将资本主义从一种主要涉及基于战争和债务的国际经济的观念,发展成了一种国家经济的观念。在1848年革命之前的几年里,Alphonse de Lamartine和Louis Blanc澄清了关于资本主义的争论,他们揭示了实际上存在两个问题,需要两个解决方案:“资本所有权的问题”和“劳动和市场分工的问题”(73)。在第二部分中,Sonenscher讨论了解决不平等问题的方法。卡尔·马克思的共产主义是“法国法律思想和德国神学的综合”,它建立在“消极的财产共同体”的基础上,其中财产可以被使用,但不能被个人占有(78,87)。亚当·斯密(Adam Smith)的许多追随者努力调和他的道德哲学的同情或美德与他的经济学的自利或权宜之计。其他哲学家则设想了国家在不废除资本主义的情况下减轻资本主义不平等的作用。例如,乔治·威廉·弗里德里希·黑格尔认为公共行政可以作为“公民社会和国家之间的桥梁和缓冲”(140)。大卫·李嘉图的比较优势理论不仅带来了利益,还导致了不同生产者的不平等回报,并使生产基本产品的生产者处于不利地位。然而,由此产生的不平等可以通过娴熟的货币和财政政策得到缓解。最后,法学家洛伦兹·冯·斯坦(Lorenz von Stein)找到了一个解决方案,其中将管理原则应用于群体可以促进“真正的社会凝聚力”(157)。在考察了这些18世纪末和19世纪初思想家思想中的二元性之后,索南舍尔回到了资本主义和商业社会之间的区别。他鼓励关注后者,因为它的复杂性和“个人从根本上相互依赖”的信念,为社会的发展开辟了许多可能性(169)。
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Interdisciplinary History features substantive articles, research notes, review essays, and book reviews relating historical research and work in applied fields-such as economics and demographics. Spanning all geographical areas and periods of history, topics include: - social history - demographic history - psychohistory - political history - family history - economic history - cultural history - technological history