The Rise of the Bourgeoisie: A History of Growing Inequality with the Industrial Revolution
A brief overview of the birth of the bourgeoisie, class conflict and the historical roots of contemporary inequalities, guided by Eric Hobsbawm.
Unfortunately, economic inequality today is at its highest levels in a century, not only between countries but also within societies. In many countries, for the first time since the Second World War, a generation is poorer than its predecessor. So I decided to write an article related to this problem, which is still very topical and will remain so for a long time to come, given the developments. (I have been wanting to write such articles for a long time.) Since I am not a political scientist or a sociologist, but a historian, I will approach the subject from this perspective. So today, guided by Eric Hobsbawm’s book The Age of Revolution, I will look at the 19th century bourgeoisie.
Hobsbawm begins his book by listing the terms that emerged in the 19th century. These are industry, industrialist, factory, middle class, working class, capitalism, socialism, aristocracy, railroad, liberal, conservative, nationality, scientist, engineer, proletariat, depression, utilitarian, statistics, social science, journalism, ideology, strike and poverty. These words are powerful enough to understand the world of the 19th century.
As you can see from the words above, the economic system of today’s world is very much based on the developments of this period. Just like the positive things, the foundation for some very negative things was laid in this period, and that is why I think this period holds some very important clues for our future. Of course, this article is not a prophecy. It’s just a brief look at the moneyed class of the 19th century. What will be discussed in this article? The economic empowerment of the bourgeoisie, its social and cultural effects, class conflicts and its impact on politics.
In 18th century Europe, a classical aristocrat’s income was mostly based on the income from land granted to him by the king and based on agricultural production, and they paid no taxes. However, they preferred to spend it on their lavish lives rather than investing it in new investments, as entrepreneurs would later do. In France, they were already frowned upon and in some cases there were legal barriers. They therefore did not have many options and turned to military and administrative positions.
Capital, Investment and the Birth of a New Class
However, at the end of this century, with the Industrial Revolution in England (the reasons that made it possible are beyond the scope of this article), a new class began to emerge. In particular, thanks to the rise of this new method of production and the cheapening of labor due to government legislation, they began to make substantial profits. Unlike the nobility, these people preferred to spend their profits on new investments rather than on luxury and pomp.
Of course, these investments were not limited to production. They went beyond the borders of Europe and bought bonds and bills from many countries, especially South America, which had just gained their independence and were aiming to develop. They also tried to play an active role in the financial markets that had begun to develop in Europe. Unfortunately, such ventures were not as lucrative as they expected. In the 1820s and 1830s, many bonds and bills held by investors exploded. For example, the Greek government could not pay the bonds it sold in the 1820s until the 1870s and restructured some of them. Many did not get their money back.
Therefore, this class began to direct their investments into safer and more stable areas, rather than into highly volatile markets such as these. The most famous examples of this were mines and railroads. In England, in particular, the length of railroads increased quite rapidly during this period. It should be noted here that the development of railroads in England was different from other countries. In countries such as France, Prussia and Russia, investments in railways were made or commissioned by the state. In Britain, however, it was almost entirely in the hands of the private sector.
Of course, the aristocrats did not watch these developments as observers. They too turned to investing to increase their incomes. Some of them tried to increase the value of their real estate. However, they were not as successful as the bourgeoisie, and most aristocrats were still reluctant to invest in new production instruments.
Global Expansion and Economic Colonization
Apart from railroads and factories, they also made significant gains in international trade. Countries like Britain, which identified the interests of the country with those of its bourgeoisie, did almost everything to ensure that their investors made more money in this trade. In order to sell products to India, they weakened their production power considerably, they forced them to trade with them by going to war with China. They even sold them opium when they had nothing else to sell. Moreover, when the Chinese government tried to take measures against this, they intervened militarily. The world had become such that even countries like the Ottoman Empire, which were independent and too powerful to be brought to its knees as easily as China or India, became increasingly dependent on the industrial products of Western Europe.
As Adam Smith put it in The Wealth of Nations, there was no longer “any need for a centralized system to control prices”. Instead of authority, the invisible hand of the market would do it. What states should do was to ensure freedom of individual enterprise, protect private property and ensure free trade by abolishing tariffs. However, despite these ideas, the bourgeoisie also wanted the support of the state. As will be seen below, in addition to suppressing uprisings, the state was needed to provide support for various investments and to use its military power for new markets. However, many countries raised tariffs to protect their bourgeoisie. In addition to the above, the development of the banking and financial sector facilitated new investments and allowed the bourgeoisie to accumulate more capital.
In the 1830s, as King Charles X of France tried to increase his authority, reactions from the bourgeoisie and liberals began to rise. After a 3-day uprising, Charles was deposed and replaced by Louis-Philippe, who was very close to the bourgeoisie. The last remnants of the old aristocracy were thus purged. The king’s powers were restricted and suffrage was extended. But this did not mean democracy had arrived. Despite the extension of suffrage, in France, where millions of people lived, only tens of thousands could vote. The right to vote was tied to property. Thus, the lower classes, who made up the majority, were pushed out of power. The movements of the 1830s were not confined to France and spread across Europe. Of these, only Belgium was successful and Belgium, whose economy was based on industry, gained independence from the Netherlands, whose economy was based on agriculture.
Consumer Culture and Bourgeois Life
By the mid-19th century, they were well entrenched in state institutions and their earnings had increased considerably. In this period, the lifestyle of the bourgeoisie also began to change. In addition to reinvesting their earnings, they began to spend them on luxurious lifestyles like the aristocrats. Although the level of this varied from country to country, they were now quite separated from the lower classes whose revolution they had once supported. At times they were even reminiscent of the aristocrats, and consumption had become a sign of social status. Bourgeois ladies began to read books that would teach them about this new way of life and the leisure time pursuits they were proud of thanks to the money their husbands earned, books that would help them become ladies themselves. Unfortunately, in this society, women’s place was limited to inside the home, the public sphere was largely male-dominated. However, the situation was very different for the working class.
In addition, they began to build various churches, opera houses, museums and mansions in neo-gothic and neo-renaissance style to rival the structures built by the aristocrats. They created public spaces for various performances. They supported scientific societies in the belief that they would make them even more profitable. They also gave importance to the arts. However, since art did not bring them direct profits, it always took a back seat.
Their dress was different from that of the aristocrats. Instead of the fancy clothes of the past, they preferred simple frock coats, suits and top hats. However, the aristocratic ornamentation was still present in women’s dress. Being fashionable became a necessity for the bourgeoisie, and Paris had become the fashion center of the world by the mid-19th century. In addition to clothes, the decoration of the home was also an important social indicator. Luxury furniture, paintings by famous artists, porcelain collections and ornate carpets covered their homes. Book collecting also became an important occupation.
Vacation culture also began to take hold during this period. Due to improved travel routes, the bourgeoisie could now go on vacation to various regions at certain times of the year to take their minds off work. In the past, it would have been seen as rebellion for aristocrats to go somewhere else without the king’s permission.
So how did this class rise so quickly? The cornerstone of the Industrial Revolution was the cotton and textile industry. Cotton, the raw material, could be bought cheaply thanks to black people working as slaves in America. During the Civil War, although this flow was interrupted, they were able to obtain it cheaply from the Ottoman and Egyptian territories.
Factories, Workers and Contradictions
In addition, thanks to laws passed by governments, many people living in rural areas left their villages due to poverty and migrated to cities where they hoped to find new opportunities. These migrants were the pillars of cheap labor, which was seen as the basis of profit. With these migrations, serious problems began to appear in the cities. In the old system, important people were located in the center of the city, but now there were poor workers in the center and bourgeois mansions on the periphery. Therefore, a new road and transportation system became necessary. However, due to poor urbanization, many diseases also began to spread. Unfortunately, the workers had no access to the health system. It was only when these diseases spread to bourgeois areas that measures were taken against them. Thus, new public spaces had to be created in the city, laying the foundations of modern municipalism.
However, it was necessary to bring these people, who were used to working in their own villages, according to their own order, into line. Therefore, the workers were paid very little and forced to work overtime (12–16 hours a day). If they did not want to, there were already many miserable people in the cities, where many people had already emigrated, who would quickly take their place. They also spread the idea that punctuality, obedience and hard work were moral human behavior to encourage workers to work hard. However, this new middle class was not so compassionate! Therefore, they did not neglect to employ women and children, who, in their opinion, were both easier to manage and cheaper. During this period, almost half of the factory workers were women and children. Needless to say, there were no safety measures in these factories, nor were there any laws to protect the condition of the workers. So many people, including children, suffered serious injuries and received almost nothing in return.
In this case, however, a paradox emerged. It was usually the workers who would buy the products of the factories, but paying them too little kept them from buying the products and the producers could not sell. For this very reason, wages had to be set at a level at which workers could buy products but at the same time not be free, and so they were.
As if that were not enough, employers did not hesitate to impose very strict rules to exploit workers. Workers who were late or unproductive had their wages cut. Workers were made dependent on their bosses through practices such as tenancy in the employer’s residence and shopping at the market owned by the employer. In the past, although peasants were not free, they had a feudal to turn to in times of trouble or to pay taxes on their behalf. Unfortunately, this system has now changed and these now free people have been left alone in a forest full of predators.
However, some members of the bourgeoisie established various charitable organizations for the workers. They built schools and hospitals for them. In this way they were making this class, to whom they sold their goods, better and more obedient.
Of course, this situation couldn’t last forever and workers started to organize and unionize and began to defend their rights, organizing strikes and protests. The Chartist movement emerged in England. According to these people, the workers were doing the real work, but the factory owners who did nothing were making the money. Philosophers like Marx argued that workers were exploited. They argued that this system would collapse because of its inherent contradictions and that a proletarian revolution would take place. In contrast, the bourgeoisie had their own ideas. According to them, capitalism brought prosperity to people. If everyone saved and invested, everyone could become rich. But we know very well that this was not the case. In the first place, there was a deep educational and social status gap between people, and unfortunately capitalism did not allow this to change.
However, employers did not stand by and watch these developments. The first thing they did was to ban unions and strikes. With the support of the government, they did not hesitate to use brute force when necessary. In the 1840s, the situation was quite different from that of the 1830s. The bourgeoisie wanted more political power than they had, the lower classes wanted more rights, and uprisings began in France and other countries. Louis-Philippe, now an incompetent king in the eyes of the bourgeoisie, was overthrown and the second Republic was established. Universal male suffrage was introduced and the laws were much more accommodating to the bourgeoisie.
In addition, workers continued to demand better living conditions and more rights. The bourgeoisie, disturbed by these demands, did not hesitate to use the political power it now possessed to suppress the workers’ uprising. Thousands of workers were killed or exiled. In other European countries, the situation was somewhat different. In Germany, while the bourgeoisie wanted liberal reforms, there was also a movement for a united Germany and the King of Prussia was invited to become Emperor of Germany, but he refused. In Austria, Hungarians and Czechs rose up for independence, but these were suppressed. Thus, the revolutions failed in all countries except France.
The reasons for this are, first of all, the position of the bourgeoisie. At first, this class, which was the bearer of these movements, did not want to share its power with the workers and adopted a more conservative stance. However, the monarchy was still an absolute power in many countries in Europe. Already in France, Napoleon III came to power in 1852 and declared himself emperor. In fact, what the bourgeoisie wanted was not democracy but an authoritarian government that would protect them, and when they found it, they did not hesitate to abandon the democratic movement.
Nevertheless, towards the end of the century workers made some gains and states were forced to introduce various social reforms. One of the most important examples was the insurance system introduced by Bismark in Germany. In Britain and France, child labor was restricted. However, it must be remembered that the main aim of these measures was to relieve workers’ unrest, not to give them the rights they demanded, and none of these measures eliminated the contradictions of capitalism.
However, the foundations of modern education were also laid in this period. The main aim here was to produce a standard citizenry that would obey the rules as well as a trained labor force for the bourgeoisie.
Conclusion: Centuries of Legacy and Uncertainty of the Future
In the following decades, although the quality of life of the lower classes improved and their rights increased, in fact the system did not change at all, it only became more complex. The contradictions of capitalism really manifested themselves in the economic depression of 1929. As is well known, this crisis was one of the causes of World War II. With the Keynesian mentality, the weight of the state in the economic system increased a little more. But the system remained the same. After the Second World War, this system bore fruit until the 2000s, but the 2008 economic crisis brought the structural problems of capitalism back to the agenda. Unfortunately, in the years since then, we have been living in a period where economic inequality has increased rapidly, unions and strikes have been banned, and various employers and techno-feudals, supported by the far right and psychological studies (unfortunately, these studies were meant to prevent these things, but were used for the opposite), have had a great influence on people. When I look ahead in today’s conditions, frankly it is very difficult to see a good future. But who knows what can happen, the future is full of surprises.