Capitalism and Slavery

IF 0.4 Q1 HISTORY Critical Historical Studies Pub Date : 2015-09-01 DOI:10.1086/683036
John J. Clegg
{"title":"Capitalism and Slavery","authors":"John J. Clegg","doi":"10.1086/683036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Was slavery capitalist? For today’s historians the question can evoke musty, long-winded debates from the 1970s. Yet in the last year three books by prominent scholars have reopened the question, catching the attention of many outside the historical profession. While they differ in many respects, these books agree that slavery was central to nineteenth-century capitalism and that it enabled the industrialization of Britain and the United States. Walter Johnson’s River of Dark Dreams graphically depicts what Johnson calls the “full throttle capitalism” of the cotton frontier. Edward Baptist’s The Half That Has Never Been Told tells “the making of American capitalism” from the point of view of the slaves who made it. Finally, Sven Beckert’s Empire of Cotton firmly situates American slavery in the context of capitalism’s global expansion at the gunpoint of an imperial British state. This new development in the historiography of slavery coincides with revived academic interest in capitalism in the wake of the recent financial crisis. Indeed these three authors are all associated with a burgeoning field in American history departments—“the history of capitalism”—in which slavery has become something of a signature topic. It is therefore strange that none of them seem interested in asking what capitalism is. Even Beckert’s field-defining essay neglected to","PeriodicalId":43410,"journal":{"name":"Critical Historical Studies","volume":"26 1","pages":"281 - 304"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2015-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/683036","citationCount":"52","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Historical Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/683036","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 52

Abstract

Was slavery capitalist? For today’s historians the question can evoke musty, long-winded debates from the 1970s. Yet in the last year three books by prominent scholars have reopened the question, catching the attention of many outside the historical profession. While they differ in many respects, these books agree that slavery was central to nineteenth-century capitalism and that it enabled the industrialization of Britain and the United States. Walter Johnson’s River of Dark Dreams graphically depicts what Johnson calls the “full throttle capitalism” of the cotton frontier. Edward Baptist’s The Half That Has Never Been Told tells “the making of American capitalism” from the point of view of the slaves who made it. Finally, Sven Beckert’s Empire of Cotton firmly situates American slavery in the context of capitalism’s global expansion at the gunpoint of an imperial British state. This new development in the historiography of slavery coincides with revived academic interest in capitalism in the wake of the recent financial crisis. Indeed these three authors are all associated with a burgeoning field in American history departments—“the history of capitalism”—in which slavery has become something of a signature topic. It is therefore strange that none of them seem interested in asking what capitalism is. Even Beckert’s field-defining essay neglected to
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
资本主义与奴隶制
奴隶制是资本主义的吗?对于今天的历史学家来说,这个问题可能会让人想起20世纪70年代的陈腐、冗长的辩论。然而,在去年,著名学者的三本著作重新讨论了这个问题,引起了历史学专业以外的许多人的注意。尽管这些书在许多方面存在分歧,但它们一致认为,奴隶制是19世纪资本主义的核心,并使英国和美国的工业化成为可能。沃尔特·约翰逊(Walter Johnson)的《黑暗之梦之河》(River of Dark Dreams)生动地描绘了约翰逊所说的棉花边疆的“全速资本主义”。爱德华·浸礼会的《从未被告知的一半》从奴隶的角度讲述了“美国资本主义的形成”。最后,斯文·贝克特(Sven Beckert)的《棉花帝国》(Empire of Cotton)坚定地将美国奴隶制置于资本主义全球扩张的背景下,置于大英帝国的枪口之下。奴隶制史学的这一新发展,与最近的金融危机之后学术界对资本主义重新产生的兴趣是一致的。事实上,这三位作者都与美国历史系的一个新兴领域有关——“资本主义史”——在这个领域,奴隶制已经成为一个标志性的话题。因此,奇怪的是,他们似乎都没有兴趣问什么是资本主义。甚至贝克特的领域界定论文也忽略了
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
期刊最新文献
Colonialism, Surplus Population, and the Marxian Critique of Political Economy Hayek against Malthus: Julian Simon’s Neoliberal Critique of Environmentalism Temporalities of Emancipation: Women, Work, and Time in 1970s America Reactionaries Marching Forward: On Worldmaking and Its Enemies Enclosed Futures: Oil Extraction in the Republic of Congo
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1