Frank-Landes Debate, Page 6
Andre Gunder Frank: We're recreating Amos and Andy, here. Maybe some of you don't remember Amos and Andy and Mutt and Jeff and so forth. Other Jeff, not that Jeff. On page 174, you say that stereotypes held an ounce of truth and a pound of lazy thinking. Unfortunately, you only say that about the stereotypes about Europe. What about all these stereotypes of yours that you attribute to the Chinese and the Russians and everywhere. How, what have you got to say about your own thinking and how can you justify these contradictory positions and there are many, many, many more. On Iberia, once, you say the ability to mobilize and exploit the latest knowledge and techniques and next you say Portuguese intellectual shortcomings became a byword. On science and technology, maybe I'll save that one until later. The fact is you keep saying that I got my facts wrong. Well, I don't have my facts wrong. All of the evidence, including that by your friend, Paul Bairoch, who is my main source on this, show that a per capita income production, productivity, competitiveness, everything, in Asia, was higher than in Europe. That with 66% of the population in 1750, the Asians produced 80% of world GNP. That the GNP estimate is your friend Bairoch's, and we discussed that at lunch and I told you. While Europeans with 20% of population produced less than 20% because the Africans and the Americans also produced something. And, in fact, contributed to the 20, to the less than 20% that the Europeans produced. And every piece of evidence that there is, as I say, about per capita income, about consumption levels, about longevity, about mortality rates, about whatever you wish to bring up, it's clear that Chinese production and income was substantially higher than that of Europe until 1750 and 1800. And, in fact, until 1750 it also was in India. You simply deny all the evidence because it doesn't fit into your scheme of things. And, in addition, as I say, you contradict yourself again and again and again and again. If your argument is both logically fallacious and empirically incorrect, how can you come here and defend it?
William Fowler: Well, I think now it's time to go to the next set of questions. The first question is from Professor Landes to Professor Frank. Again, seven minutes and then seven minutes.
The question to Professor Frank is, “Fairy Tales: periods of faster population growth in Asia must have entailed higher growth of output and higher productivity, Why?”
Andre Gunder Frank: Well, I just answered that. Unfortunately. I...
William Fowler: Should we go along quickly?
Andre Gunder Frank: I should have kept my ammunition. If, if it is the case that population grew faster in Asia than it did in Europe, which it did, because it grew at about 6 tenths of a percent per year in one and a half, two centuries before 1750 in Asia and it grew at between 2 to 3 tenths of one percent in Europe. Then it must have been that either Asia became poorer, which it didn't, per capita, or, that production grew in tandem with population increase. That is to say that production was able to increase so much as to support that higher population growth, which it did not in Europe. Secondly, there is circumstantial evidence, that is, the famous, so-called, Price Revolution in Europe in the 16th Century, and the question arises whether there was a similar inflation in Asia and the answer is that there was not. Also, the question of whether there was a so-called 17th Century crisis or depression in Asia, as there was in Europe, and the answer is also that there was not. That is to say, from 1400 until 1750 there was a long period of economic expansion throughout Asia and particularly in China and India, which Europe did not participate in nearly as much, contrary to everything that you say. So much so, that the arrival of greater money and therefore, increase in demand in Europe drove up prices and inflation. And in Asia, what it did, was elicit greater supply of goods so that there was no inflation but instead, there was population growth. The evidence is everywhere for you to pick up, you simply refuse to look at it.
David Landes: My turn? Well, it's true faster population growth can reflect increased product, but it also bring about a fall in product per head. And I only wish that Asia over the course of its history was, in fact, getting higher output and higher productivity every time population goes up. And, exactly, not every time.
Andre Gunder Frank: But then.
David Landes: Yeah. But you assume it must have entailed this.
Andre Gunder Frank: Yes.
David Landes: Yes, well, since it can have, since it can go both ways. And since our data on Asia and population and product per head are nothing at all comparable to what we have for Europe and that in itself is a very interesting point. That this relatively well to do civilization has really preserved so little in the way of records of its past, in spite of a highly authoritative form of government and the kind of thing that really does presumably try to keep records. That's a very interesting thing that we don't have this thing. The result is that lots of historians try to make a living suggesting possible plots to explain Asian performance. I'm not persuaded. When the Europeans get to Asia, they're not struck by the wealth of Asia.
Andre Gunder Frank: Of course they are.
David Landes: Oh, no, they're not. A lot of them come and they're struck by the poverty of Asia. Now, maybe you don't want to read the people who talk about poverty. But I read them, I find them very persuasive. Especially, what we know about Asia in general. I, you say, I deny the evidence of Chinese product and income higher than Europe because it doesn't fit into my scheme of things. That's an interesting question of methodology. I have found that it's a good idea when you come across evidence, in quotes, that supposedly contradicts other evidence, that I do not assume that one is right and the other is wrong and I try to reconcile them. And what I see is that the Europeans come to Asia and they have many of the material things in life in larger quantity than the Asians. Now, and they're struck by that. So, I think, I mean, I look at Pomeranz, in China, that's the new school. The Chinese has iron shares to their plows and the Chinese had stoves, metal stoves that did a lot of heating. I don't know how much information we have on that. We do have information on quantities in Europe and on consumption in Europe, very early on, and what I see is that the Europeans have these things and we can even count them. No, I, I'm not impressed by a lot of the so-called new work, in part, because it makes it very hard to account for the ease in which the Europeans established themselves in Asia, kicked the Asians around, tyrannized them and, in general, took whatever they wanted. So, I say to myself, that's very interesting. When people do that, it means they're stronger, and if they're stronger, we want to know why. And all this talk about the wealth of China and so on. No, I don't see that. Now there may have been some wealthy Chinese, I don't doubt that, but I think that the great mass of the Chinese people were poor. Compared to England and the Netherlands, very poor.
Andre Gunder Frank: May I?
William Fowler: Well, why don't we just continue with you.
Andre Gunder Frank: I no longer know where we are here.
David Landes: Huh?
Andre Gunder Frank: You say Mr. Smith never went to China...
David Landes: Yeah.
Andre Gunder Frank: ...before 1776. Well, maybe you did. But, at least, but, at least Smith read of a people and here is what he said. That, “China, Egypt and India were the wealthiest according to all accounts that ever were in the world and are chiefly renowned for their superiority in agriculture and manufacture. All accounts. You find some example that even...
David Landes: You believe that? You believe that? You believe that about Egypt and so on?
Andre Gunder Frank: No. You say... You say... You say it's permanent. I'm saying that everybody...
William Fowler: Gentlemen, Gentlemen
Andre Gunder Frank: Okay.
David Landes: Okay, good.
Page 1 / Page 2 / Page 3 / Page 4 / Page 5 / Page 6 / Page 7 / Page 8 / Page 9 / Page 10 / Page 11 / Page 12
Photo 1 / Photo 2 / Photo 3 / Photo 4 / Photo 5 / Photo 6 / Photo 7 / Photo 8 / Photo
