In the 19th century, Russia and Latin America responded similarly to industrialization in the formation of a growing middle class, in a “boom” in exports and new economic ties, in urbanization, and in similar acts of revolutionary disobedience against a dictator. Latin America, as a result of industrialization, created a small market for manufactured goods unlike Russia’s vast industrial market powered by foreign investments. Also, there were long-term effects to Russia’s revolution in which a socialist political party was created as a result of industrialization, unlike Latin America which was immobilized with regional conflicts and factionalism.
The globalization of industrialization began in Britain, spread throughout continental Western Europe, and then found it’s way into Russia and the United States only to provoke industrialization in Latin America. Thus, agricultural innovations such as selective breeding and lighter plows gave Britain an advantage in industrialization which later indirectly influenced the process of industrialization in Russia and Latin America. As a result of Russia’s industrialization, a middle class of businessmen and professionals was formed because they were required to work the new centers of industrial development. In addition, this growing middle class was created subsequent to the development of factories and heavy industry; steel production was rapidly accelerating to contest the threat of European modern industry and major industries were formed in coal, textiles, and oil. Although Europe was still prominent in its industrial superiority, this industrial competition led to Russia ranking fourth in the world in its steel manufacturing. Thus, as a response to industrialization, Russia entered tr...
... middle of paper ...
...reated an emerging working class as a response to factories and the need for people to work them; as a response to immense social tensions of industrialization, both regions had distinct revolutions for better working conditions. Russia and Latin America responded differently to industrialization in that Russia created a socialist political party and a unified working class in order to combat industrial social tensions leading to an international, long term, effect of their revolution whereas Mexico experienced factionalism which led to short-term effects condensed within their region solely. Also, Russia responded to industrialization by creating steady enterprises, manufacturing efforts, and foreign investments unlike Latin America which did not engage in manufacturing or investments, thus did not have an ‘Industrial Revolution” as did their Russian counterparts.
The mid-19th century is one of the major turnarounds in the history of the United States. That is the time when America became an industrial giant and emerged as one of the most powerful countries in the world. The Industrial Revolution changed the people’s way of living in the whole world, especially the United States, from hand and home productivity to machine and factory. America rose from a rural and agricultural country to an urban-industrial that introduced new technologies. The United States has been through a lot of ups and downs in spite of its emergence and three books tell the story of the Industrial America from three different perspectives.
The era that marked the end of civil war and the beginning of the twentieth century in the united states of America was coupled with enormous economic and industrial developments that attracted diverse views and different arguments on what exactly acquisition of wealth implied on the social classes in the society. It was during this time that the Marxist and those who embraced his ideologies came out strongly to argue their position on what industrial revolution should imply in an economic world like America. In fact, there was a rapid rise in the gross national product of the United States between 1874 and 1883. This actually sparked remarkable consequences on the political, social and economic impacts. In fact, the social rejoinder to industrialization had extensive consequences on the American society. This led to the emergence of social reform movements to discourse on the needs of the industrialized society. Various theories were developed to rationalize the widening gap between the rich and the poor. Various reformers like Andrew Carnegie, Henry George and William Graham Sumner perceived the view on the obligation of the wealthy differently. This paper seeks to address on the different views held by these prominent people during this time of historical transformations.
Late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century were the years of achievement, the years of one huge reform, the years that shaped the present day in so many ways. The present day industrial workers owe their stable life, pleasant working conditions, and a variety of insurances to nothing else but these fifty four years. The struggling lives of industrial proletariat (thesis), their desire for improvement (antithesis), and the emergence of the welfare state, political democracy, trading unions, and social equality (synthesis) skillfully describe the picture of the events happening in those days.
In the late 19th century, Japan and Germany each developed into powerful, imperial countries as a result of modernizing and transforming into a manufacturing based society. The manufacturing industry is most favorable for a society because it “promotes the general welfare, increases population, public revenue, and the power of the country.” (List, 9). The people who benefitted most from the rapid industrialization and modernization were the owners of capital at the top of the political hierarchy and the Industrial Middle Class. By turning away from the feudal, agricultural based society to a manufacturing based society Japan and Germany were enabled to efficiently “extend [their] influence to all parts of the world.” (List,9). One reason for Japan and Germany’s rapid industrialization was the active role played by their governments who promoted and guided change. Each country used their powerful military to be recognized as a dominant force in the markets which as a result encouraged industrialization, however, the initial motives for industrialization in japan and Germany differed due to the pre-existing conditions in each country.
Meyer, David R. The Roots of American Industrialization. N.p.: JHU, 2003. N. pag. Google Books. JHU Press. Web. 29 Sept. 2013
America reaped great benefits from the new wave of Industrialization during the 1890’s. There was an abundance of advanced, new technologies that made large-scale production easier and more achievable. These new factories produced more goods than ever before, and they were open to the middle-class. Yet this modernization was not all for the best, with the result being a decent amount of civil unrest. There were large issues with immigration. Everyday, there were thousands of Europeans who were coming to America looking for work. Despite the fact that the working conditions were awful and the wages weren’t much better, they were better than the work overseas. There was also the rising issue of anarchists becoming more and more of a problem as they were becoming more vocal. The worker’s strikes also contributed to some of the chaos of the Industrialization period. Strikes soon turned violent as the strikes came one after the other. Unemployment numbers continued to grow as the capitalists slowly grew richer. People such as Theodore Roosevelt, Jane Addams and Edward Bellamy and his followers each had different opinions with that what was wrong with industrialized America and how to fix it.
During the late 1700’s, the United States was no longer a possession of Britain, instead it was a market for industrial goods and the world’s major source for tobacco, cotton, and other agricultural products. A labor revolution started to occur in the United States throughout the early 1800’s. There was a shift from an agricultural economy to an industrial market system. After the War of 1812, the domestic marketplace changed due to the strong pressure of social and economic forces. Major innovations in transportation allowed the movement of information, people, and merchandise. Textile mills and factories became an important base for jobs, especially for women. There was also widespread economic growth during this time period (Roark, 260). The market revolution brought about economic growth through new modes of transportation, an abundance of natural resources, factory production, and banking and legal practices.
The changes accompany the transition from one epoch to another. In the late nineteenth century labor has become a commodity to the merchants, and the formation of a new mode of production has risen which gave rise to a capitalist society. There is a new class distinction between the laborer and those who owned the means of production.
As mentioned previously war time creates hardships and sometimes those hardships are difficult to recover from. The outcome of the Mexican Revolution included millions of peasants being killed. Marentes describes peasants as hard-working, highly skilled agricultural labors. With the loss of so many peasants the harvest became scarce and many were lacking work. The Mexican government was unable to replenish resources and improve the way of life in Mexico causing ...
This preliminary period was followed by more rapid growth in a society still overwhelmingly agricultural. Russia had well-developed industrial sectors by the early 20th century, but paused well behind the West. Russia became the only society to experience full-fledged political and social revolution after the. industrialisation process is well under way. The reform period in the 1860s that brought limited freedom for the serfs also produced a host of other political changes, some of which.
The Russian and Mexican revolution’s differed in the ideas they adopted but they were similar in the way they met their goals and started their uprisings. The Russian revolution was made with the goal to create an egalitarian government that was based off of Karl Marx’s socialism principles. In short, t...
The mid 19th century was an age of growth like no other. The term “Industrial Revolution” refers to the time period where production changed from homemade goods, to those produced by machines and factories. As industrial growth developed and cities grew, the work done by men and women diverged from the old agricultural life. People tended to leave home to work in the new factories being built. They worked in dangerous conditions, were paid low wages, and lacked job security (Kellogg). It is difficult to argue, however, that the economic development of the United States was not greatly dependent on the industrial revolution.
Industrial Revolution, which took place over much of the nineteenth century, had many advantages. It provided people with tools for a better life; people were no longer dependent on the land for all of their goods. The Industrial Revolution made it possible for people to control nature more than they ever had before. However, now people were dependent on the new machines of the Industrial Age (1). The Revolution brought with it radical changes in the textile and engine worlds; it was a time of reason and innovations. Although it was a time of progress, there were drawbacks to the headway made in the Industrial Revolution. Granted, it provided solutions to the problems of a world without industry. However, it also created problems with its mechanized inventions that provided new ways of killing. Ironically, there was much public faith in these innovations; however, these were the same inventions that killed so many and contributed to a massive loss of faith. These new inventions made their debut in the first world war (2) ).
The Mexican Revolution was intended to drag the common man from the poverty of lower class society in Mexico, and bestow upon them an equal portion of land and wealth in order to equilibrate the economic and social status in the nation. The ecomienda system allowed a few patrons to hold all of the wealth in a certain area and exert complete control over a city and the people that lived within it. The Revolution was intended to redistribute the land and power to the lower and middle classes, but this was not the case once the fighting ceased. The lower classes moved to urban areas in order to find work and pay while the rural towns that were under the control of one person became a ghost of what they once were. Juan Rulfo lived in Mexico while these events were taking place and wrote Pedro Paramo just after the conclusion of the Mexican Revolution. Juan Rulfo saw the shortcomings of the Revolution and, through the characters of Pedro Paramo, Susana San Juan, and Juan Preciado, critiqued the failures of the Revolution to precipitate the change that it initially promised.
The industrial revolution began in Europe in the 18th century. The revolution prompted significant changes, such as technological improvements in global trade, which led to a sustained increase in development between the 18th and 19th century. These improvements included mastering the art of harnessing energy from abundant carbon-based natural resources such as coal. The revolution was economically motivated and gave rise to innovations in the manufacturing industry that permanently transformed human life. It altered perceptions of productivity and understandings of mass production which allowed specialization and provided industries with economies of scale. The iron industry in particular became a major source of economic growth for the United States during this period, providing much needed employment, which allowed an abundant population of white people as well as minorities to contribute and benefit from the flourishing economy. Steel production boomed in the U.S. in the mid 1900s. The U.S. became a global economic giant due to the size of its steel industry, taking advantage of earlier innovations such as the steam engine and the locomotive railroad. The U.S. was responsible for 65 percent of steel production worldwide by the end of the 2nd World War (Reutter 1). In Sparrows Point: Making Steel: the Rise and Ruin of American Industrial Might, Mark Reutter reports that “Four out of every five manufacturing items contained steel and 40 percent of all wage earners owed their livelihood directly or indirectly to the industry.” This steel industry was the central employer during this era.