# The Shift from Hierarchical Values to Bourgeois Ideals
Written on
Chapter 1: The Roots of Economic Transformation
In previous discussions, Dr. McCloskey highlighted that the significant economic growth known as the Great Enrichment, which began around 1800, cannot be solely attributed to institutional advancements such as property rights.
Quote from the original text: "Property laws are necessary but they are nothing like sufficient for the startling betterment that begins in the Industrial Revolution..."
Section 1.1: The Necessity of Ideas
In this chapter, McCloskey emphasizes the distinction between what is necessary and what is sufficient for economic progress. While property rights are essential, they alone do not account for the extraordinary improvements witnessed during the Industrial Revolution and the subsequent Great Enrichment over the last century and a half. This growth occurred long after the supposed enhancement of property rights post-1688, challenging the North-Acemoglu framework in economic history.
Subsection 1.1.1: Overcoming Hierarchical Constraints
McCloskey argues that prior to the Great Enrichment, society’s reverence for hierarchy needed to be dismantled to unlock significant economic advancement. A society may exhibit individualism, but if it predominantly honors aristocracy, ordinary individuals are barred from engaging in trade or innovation.
Section 1.2: The Great Chain of Being
The medieval concept of The Great Chain of Being, which reinforced social hierarchies, was prevalent in the 1600s and 1700s. In this framework, the aristocracy viewed the improvement of one's social standing through trade as a threat to the established order.
Chapter 2: The Transition to Mercantilism
In the TED Talk, "Do schools kill creativity?" Sir Ken Robinson discusses how educational systems often stifle innovation and creativity, paralleling McCloskey's argument about the necessity of breaking free from hierarchical constraints to foster economic growth.
The feudal system dominated the medieval era, relying on a rigid hierarchy. Lords possessed significant wealth but owed responsibilities to their serfs, who were equally bound to their roles. Disruptions like the Crusades, famines, and plagues ultimately eroded feudalism, leading to the rise of mercantilism, where merchants began to gain recognition as a valuable source of taxable wealth.
However, socially, neither the peasantry nor the nobility welcomed these emerging merchants. In Shakespeare's time, bourgeois values were often scorned, as the gentry and aristocrats dismissed the thriftiness and industriousness that characterized the bourgeois lifestyle.
Section 2.1: The Scorn for Bourgeois Values
The derision towards the bourgeois class is understandable, as McCloskey's system of trade-tested betterment disrupts traditional hierarchies. It allows individuals, regardless of their social standing, the opportunity to pursue their ideas, leading to social mobility that threatens established norms.
Quote from the original text: "Wanting a stable society is understandable but how to reconcile that wish with the instability inherent in capitalism?"
Subsection 2.1.1: Creative Destruction
In the video "Alien Crash Site," Natalie Elliot explores themes of disruption and transformation, echoing Schumpeter's idea of creative destruction, which posits that some industries must decline to make room for innovation.
As industries evolve, less efficient businesses must fail, allowing resources to be allocated more effectively. This inherent instability can be unsettling, yet early American capitalism managed these transitions well, supported by strong civil societies, as noted by de Tocqueville in the 1830s.
Conclusion: Embracing Bourgeois Virtues
McCloskey argues that the Great Enrichment would not have been possible without a cultural shift away from the traditional Great Chain of Being towards a greater appreciation for bourgeois values. If trade and the advancements brought forth by the bourgeoisie were not respected, and if liberty in commerce and innovation were devalued, modern society would have stagnated long ago.
The recognition of bourgeois virtues was not uniform across countries and eras, emerging at different times in places like Scotland, England, France, Germany, Japan, China, and India. As these societies adopted more favorable views towards bourgeois ideals, industrialization and economic growth followed suit.
Even so, McCloskey warns that lingering sentiments of hierarchy and disdain for bourgeois values persist in some circles, reminding us of the importance of understanding the factors that contributed to our economic prosperity.
Ultimately, the cultural embrace of bourgeois ideals has significantly influenced our high standard of living, but a reversal in this cultural shift could threaten our progress. Understanding this evolution is crucial to safeguarding the economic advancements we have made.