Capitalism: A Global History (2025)
Sven Beckert (1965)
1325 pages
The capitalistic economy of the present day is an immense cosmos into which the individual is born, and which presents itself to him … as an unalterable order of things in which he must live. It forces the individual … to conform to capitalistic rules of action. The manufacturer who in the long run acts counter to these norms, will just as inevitably be eliminated from the economic scene as the worker who cannot or will not adapt himself to them will be thrown into the streets without a job.
Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism
This observation, surely even more salient today than when Weber made it over a century ago, points to a fundamental challenge society faces when addressing concerns with our current economic system. Viewing capitalism as a natural, "unalterable order of things" can make attempts to significantly reform it – or, even more radically, transition to some other system – seem at best quixotic and at worst almost sacrilegious. With the Overton window for acceptable debate on potential economic policy changes so narrow, when too many become convinced the system is rigged against them, frustration can build toward revolution – destroy what is not allowed to be fixed.
To counter the slide into such a ruinous path to reform, one must first disabuse people of the debilitating myth of capitalism’s inalterability, of the belief that it is an inevitable outcome of history. Given the wealthy, powerful, and extremely motivated capitalists whose self-interest lies in maintaining this myth, however, countering it requires a thorough and detailed exploration of the history of capitalism and the role calculated choices have played in its rise.
Precisely this, historian Sven Beckert provides readers in his engaging book Capitalism: A Global History. By tracing the path of the “capitalist revolution” (xiii) over the past thousand years, he demonstrates that
Global capitalism was neither a natural state of things nor a straightforward undertaking – the restructuring of ever more parts of the world and of social life along a capitalist logic was, in fact, exceedingly difficult and took centuries to unfold. It took even longer to reach a state in which this peculiar way of organizing economic life seemed “natural” (232)
The likely jarring impact, for most readers, of the word peculiar, highlights both the challenge and the importance of this work.
Beckert begins at “the port of Aden in the year 1150 … with the world's earliest capitalists – merchants,” (27) who “shared a principal aim of amassing profit by buying cheaply and selling dearly.” (38) Though their activities were not generally suppressed, neither were they quite seen as honorable: among land-owning elites, religious leaders and the broader community of mostly peasant farmers, opinions about such trade-for-profit had not changed much since Aristotle disparaged “efforts to maximize money [as] ‘a hazard to the moral well-being of the individual.’” (88)
Nevertheless, Beckert notes, these early traders represented the beginning of a radical shift from the subsistence existence of the overwhelming majority of humankind. Over the balance of the book, he describes the millennium-long series of truly epochal developments that transformed this group of isolated capitalists into a globe-spanning political economy, capitalism. And by including stories of particular capitalists and their workers from each of these stages of development, he brings alive his descriptions of the social, political, and economic changes that occurred.
Early on, he provides his definition of capitalism as
a global process in which economic life is fundamentally driven by the ceaseless accumulation of privately controlled capital, is structured by the state, and propels the ever expanding commodification of inputs and outputs, including labor, creating constantly shifting boundaries between its outside and inside. (21)
Beckert repeatedly returns to the elements of this definition in describing the series of transformative shifts that have occurred over the thousand-year evolution toward global capitalism. He makes evident that, at each stage, those in power privileged the expansion of capitalism over other possible directions, and thus that capitalism’s present-day arrangement arose not out of an ineluctable, natural process, but rather through a long series of specific, human choices.
Striking, in Beckert’s account, is how consistently these choices can be traced directly back to the profoundly durable simplicity of capitalists’ singular goal: from early traders “buying cheaply and selling dearly” to modern day investment firms for “which nothing but the ongoing accumulation of capital drives entrepreneurial decisions” (1074), “economic life [has been] fundamentally driven by the ceaseless accumulation of privately controlled capital.” This overarching focus on capital accumulation reveals itself as the principal driver behind the variety of ways capitalists have spent the past millennium either sparking political or social transformation, or adapting to the immutable reality of a particular political or social regime.
To be clear, calling out this focus is not meant as a pejorative observation: one can recount capitalism’s many benefits, or recall its variety of shortcomings, and either way acknowledge capitalists’ enduring fixation on capital accumulation. Nor does it obviate the value of Beckert’s fascinating and enlightening elaboration of the specifics of the transformations and adaptations that have led to our present system of global capitalism – the details of his narrative are, in fact, critical to understanding the intentional character of its development and its consequences.
As an example of the impact of this focus on capital accumulation, Beckert repeatedly emphasizes the role of the state as a key supporter in the installation and expansion of global capitalism.
Capitalism is as much a project of states as of capital owners…. Whether by supporting it in its day-to-day operations or during its most severe crises, states have propelled and backstopped the capitalist revolution through its history. (1076)
Already a millennium ago, traders recognized the benefit (in terms of increased profits) of ingratiating themselves to the state by providing desired goods and, more importantly, a source of funds. And states came to cherish and rely on the funds generated by such traders (through taxation), and so actively supported their growth, both militarily and politically. As these isolated traders evolved into merchants and then capitalists, the links to the state only deepened.
In Europe, this cooperation became particularly strong, with taxes on capitalists funding state militaries, which were in turn marshalled not only to protect capitalist property, but also to conquer far-flung lands to expand trade and manufacturing. And internally, states put in place laws in support of increasing capitalists’ profits, often thereby changing the historical foundations of societies. Referring to this stage of development as war capitalism, Beckert describes how states engaged in “imperial expansion and armed trade … and on violent domination of labor and vast dispossession of collective resources.” (164) This early, deep integration in Europe, he argues, resulted in European dominance in the increasingly global capitalist order of the 19th and 20th centuries.
Similarly, Beckert describes how, again in pursuit of capital accumulation, capitalism “has been perfectly compatible with … commodification of labor across a spectrum of forms.” This has included, “at key historical moments, slavery,” (20) certainly the most reprehensible in what he demonstrates to be a long string of dehumanizing ways in which capitalists have pursued the cheapest possible labor in order to maximize profits (generally with active state support and at best a fig leaf justification for the resulting misery). In terms of slavery, in particular, he makes a persuasive case for its centrality in the successful transformation of capitalism into a globe-spanning system and for playing a key role in supporting the rise of European and US economic dominance.
The consequences of capitalists’ single-minded focus on capital accumulation can also be found in their seemingly unlimited adaptability to whatever ruling order they encounter. Though they may prefer one type of regime over another, “capitalism can flourish within a wide range of forms of political rule. As with diverse labor and territorial regimes, capitalism is undogmatic in regard to political systems as well.” (799) And yet, he notes a caveat that demonstrates the rule:
Despite my insistence throughout the book on capitalism’s flexibility as the foundation for its enormous dynamic, capitalism is dogmatic in one sense: It rests on the ever expanding accumulation of capital … not by choice but by necessity. (1086)
Beyond these examples, Beckert goes into detail on myriad other ways capitalism’s expansion has played out, including: the aggressive pursuit of colonization and, later, attempts to mollify the impacts of decolonization; the active ignoring of externalities, such as natural resources in terms of both raw materials and pollution; and, supporting social benefits when revolutionary fever grew too strong, only to reduce or retract them at the earliest possible opportunity. In each of these areas, and others, his narrative makes evident the willful choices made to prioritize the “dogmatic” focus on “every expanding accumulation of capital” over all other considerations.
A throughline reveals itself, of capitalists aggressively translating their wealth into political power, in order to advance their interests by changing the social narrative and the law. A key part of this approach has involved the propagation of myths to enable and legitimize their actions. Thus, for example, in terms of the connection between capitalism and states,
the global seepage of capitalism into the nooks and crannies of many societies was not the result of a “natural” expansion of self-propelling markets, as many contemporary myths hold. Instead, the state engineered multiple forms of enclosure, envelopment, and encasement that drove capitalism’s spread, often pursuing policies with a pronounced anti-market twist. (714)
Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway explore this in the US context, in The Big Myth: How American Business Taught Us to Loathe Government and Love the Free Market (my review linked to at right), in which they point out that
what's at issue is not capitalism per se. Contemporary conservatives, libertarians, and market fundamentalists are not really defending capitalism, even if they think they are. They are defending a certain idea of capitalism, a vision of growth and innovation by unfettered markets where government just gets out of the way. ... To the extent that it once did (approximately) exist, it was a disaster: a world with little or no workplace safety, no constraints on pollution, no limits to the trees that could be cut down or the dangerous products that could be sold.” (13; The Big Myth)
Yet in reality, as Beckert repeatedly demonstrates, “capitalism without the state was impossible, indeed unimaginable.” (97)
In Capitalism: A Global History, Sven Beckert accomplishes the improbable: make a 1000+ page history of an economic system fascinating and engaging from the first lines to the last, while at the same time providing a thoroughly researched, scholarly account. And a balanced one. He makes good on his opening comment, of his book being
ultimately not interested in contributing to the debit and credit columns of the opposing stories [of capitalism]. Instead, it examines capitalism from a global and long-term perspective to grasp its core: a radical departure and discontinuity in human affairs. … [and inviting readers] to embrace its study with a sense of wonder, surprise, and astonishment – not because it is ‘good’ or ‘bad’ but because of its world-shaping power, and because understanding it is crucial to navigating our shared future. (5)
Such an approach too often seems missing from discussions about capitalism, with its proponents focused on what they view as its benefits, and its opponents on what they consider its historical and present-day flaws. Though one can imagine that some readers – surely including those beholden to a successful social inculcation of the myths of free market fundamentalism – will push back on aspects of Beckert’s presentation, their challenge will be to refute what they disagree with in an equally thorough and persuasive way.
Beckert’s nuanced history of capitalism goes a long way toward supporting a more productive discussion about addressing the economic challenges so central to the rise of populist movements and increasingly divisive partisanship in the West, and of uncertainty and instability more broadly.
Other notes and information:
Have you read this book, others by this author, or even similar ones by other authors? I’d enjoy hearing your thoughts.
Other of my book reviews: FICTION Bookshelf and NON-FICTION Bookshelf
