Saturday, February 22, 2020

The Process of Industrialization Research Paper

The Process of Industrialization - Research Paper Example Some feel that the amount of income increased, but this was easily offset by the repercussions of those earnings. It is critical to weigh the merits of each proposition in order to effectively assess the effects of industrialization on worker’s conditions of living. Marxists and their attack on industrialization Marxists were the most predominant opponents of the industrial revolution. They believed that capitalism was an unjust system in which controllers of capital took advantage of the masses for economic gain. Therefore, to adherents of this school of thought, industrialization spelt nothing but gloom and doom for the group. Marxists could not fathom a situation where workers were better off in the industrial era than they were in previous economic periods. The very fact that factory owners were trying to squeeze out as much surplus value as possible from their employee was reason enough to oppose it. Members of this school did not really care whether workers could purchas e more goods or access more products than they had initially accessed in previous regimes. Their concern was the injustice that was meted against these persons. To the Marxist, controllers of capital simply paid workers seemingly higher wages in order to compensate for the exploitative work conditions in their factories. Industrialization took away workers’ control over resources and put it in the hands of a few people. Wages may have been lower in the pre-industrial era but at least resource ownership was less concentrated than during the industrial revolution. However, these arguments may not hold water when one examines the rate at which incomes rose between 1820 and 1860. Even though Marxists make a strong point when highlighting the ills of industrialization, their assertions must be compared to the conditions of living before the industrial era. These theorists still have a problem with the system of land ownership and mercantilism in pre-industrial Britain. Therefore, they seem to object to almost every method of economic control. In fact, their ideal society was one in which equal distribution of wealth existed; that is the communist society (Jessop and Wheatley 55). The point of this paper is not to determine whether industrialization was exploitative; it is to decipher whether it had a positive or negative effect on the population. Positive outcomes can arise even in exploitative conditions. Some gains occurred in workers’ lives but one must asses whether those gains were sufficient enough to warrant a change in their standards of living. It is for this reason that other elements of history must be examined. Liberalists and the consumer revolution Another school of thought emerged concerning the living conditions of persons in the industrial revolution, and this was the liberalist school. Followers of this theory asserted that industrialization was a beneficial occurrence in the lives of these workers because it ushered in the consumer revolution. These rapid changes in production processes enabled the creation of mass consumer goods at affordable prices. Therefore, for the first time, the average laborer could afford such things. At the theoretical level, it can be deduced that industrialization led to an expansion of markets, which sold manufactured goods. Additionally, the industrial re

Wednesday, February 5, 2020

Napolean's Defeat Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Napolean's Defeat - Term Paper Example The Aim of his reforms was to consolidate whatever was good in the Revolution and to conciliate those who had suffered at its hands without compromising the essential principle of Equality, Liberty and Fraternity. His conciliation of the Church and migrs did not restore their pre-Revolution privileges or power. Napoleon as a emperor of France and 'Son of the Revolutionary' he launched a new offensive against the absolute monarchies of Europe with the main purpose of spreading the Revolutionary principles to other countries and to glorify himself and France. There was a fundamental difference between the character of the wars waged by Revolutionary France from 1792 to 1802 and the Napoleonic Wars from 1803 onwards. The former were wars of liberation; they carried the message of the Revolution to the down-trodden people of foreign countries; they roused in them hopes of deliverance from the tyranny of absolutism, and hence wherever the French soldier went they were regarded by masses as helpers, friends and saviors of the underprivileged classes. But the Napoleonic wars did not rouse any such popular fervor. They were waged by an Imperial Despot to achieve glory and therefore instead of rousing sympathy, in the long run, they roused antagonism. The national self respect of the countries invaded by Napoleon was roused against him and was, in the end, one of the most important causes of his downfall. Napoleon trampled on the national sentiments of vanquished people by placing his brothers and sisters on their thrones. He was no longer regarded as a deliverer from the tyranny of absolute rulers; he was hated as a usurper and tyrant. Causes of Downfall of Napoleon Napoleon, 'the man of Destiny' and the 'son of the Revolution' had a phenomenal rise. The forces of the Revolution threw him into the limelight from the comparative oblivion, and once he had grasped the public gaze in dispersing the Paris mob with great alacrity and success in 1795, he continued to climb higher and higher till he became the Emperor of France in 1804. He so dominated the French and European stage that the period of his ascendancy - the years 1799-1815 -- is called the 'Napoleonic era.' His hold on Europe during this period was complete and the destiny of Europe depended on his whims and fancies. Napoleon was a genius both an administrator and as a general. His finest qualities of leadership and generalship always came to forefront in time of adversity. He was a master of strategy and brilliant campaigning. He was essentially a soldier and his inherent love of conquest and domination in the long run alienated the whole Europe and roused bitter national animosity against which he could do nothing. The whole of Europe was arrayed against him and finally was responsible for his overthrow. 1. Military Causes (i) Enormous losses in the Peninsular War, the Russian Campaign and the War