Frank-Landes Debate, Page 11
Andre Gunder Frank: To Japan.
William Fowler: Yeah, but, Professor Frank...
Andre Gunder Frank: The question is...
William Fowler:...we need another question.
Andre Gunder Frank: My question is, why do you totally reject the Smithian world economic analysis which I try to use and try to replace it by the 19th century and 20th century Marxism and Weberianism, which has long since proven to be total nonsense?
William Fowler: In order to allow sufficient time for both Professor Landes and Professor Frank to make a concluding remark, I'd like to limit us to just one more question if we may, please.
Questioner 3: Thank you. Yeah, this is a, just a question that I would like a comment from both of you on. One of the aspects that hasn't been discussed in terms of technology and in terms of wealth is distribution through the society. That is, the question of the relationship between elites and commoners. If somebody goes to China and says, what a wealthy society, my impression is, he's looking at the courts. And if somebody goes and says, what poverty, my impression is that he's probably looking at the commoner population and this is true, not only of wealth, but, of course, the distribution, or the dissemination of technological innovation and knowledge and so on and so... If you could just address that as, as, in a sense, one of the ways to deal with the disagreement between the two of you, I'd appreciate it.
Andre Gunder Frank: Well, you... I'll go first?
David Landes: Yeah.
Andre Gunder Frank: Well, I'm glad you asked that because it goes to an essential part of my argument. Your question involves two things, one is technology and the other is essential the distribution of income and the stratification of the society. On technology, briefly, we definitely disagree, because all the evidence that I look at which he doesn't look at at all, is, that, in Chinese, Indian and Ottoman technology was on a par and ahead of European until 1750, and that includes gunnery, incidentally. And, in particular, naval technology.
David Landes: You should fight on their side.
Andre Gunder Frank: Well, why, why is it that the British East India Company commissioned ships to be built in India until 1830 and imported ships from India all the time? Because Indian naval technology was better than English.
David Landes: No.
Andre Gunder Frank: But let's go to the other question.
David Landes: Okay.
Andre Gunder Frank: About the distribution of income. That, in fact, is a crucial part of my argument. The inflow of silver was not a cause of, but helped, fueled, if you wish, the economic development of Asia more than of Europe. In doing so, it also fueled and increasing polarization of the society. Socially and economically creating a, if you wish, leisure class, to use Veblen's terminology, at the top, which consumed luxuries, both domestic and imported, and creating an underclass at the bottom which was willing and able and had to work for low wages. Therefore, the very process of Asian development, not its non-development but its yes development, generated the causes and consequences of subsequent Asian decline because of the structure of demand from the people at the top and the cheap labor force from the people at the bottom which was much more so the case in India and China than it was in Europe. Therefore, it did not generate the incentives for technological development of the Industrial revolution kind in Asia and it did do so in Europe after 1750 when it became possible to do so. So, this was related to technology only in the sense that there was, of course, technology and technological in Asia as well as there was in Europe which supported the increase in income which supported the polarization of the society as we see it today. For instance, also in the United States with the consequences that it also has today in the United States of a slowing down in the growth rate which gave the Europeans the opportunity to do a newly industrializing economies strategy, first of import substitution and then of export promotion, the same as the East Asians now. That's my answer.
William Fowler: Professor Landes, care to comment?
David Landes: I would just point out that when I try to put pieces together and be guided by theory and logic, I find that if wages are lower, it means that growth is presumably slower or that there is a big backed-up supply of cheap labor to keep wages down. It doesn't fit at all into your picture of what was going on in Asia.
Andre Gunder Frank: Of course it does.
David Landes: No, it does not. And that's exactly why Europe is so different. I also have problems with timing. 1750. Let's try the steam engine in 1709, alright? Stocking frames and other weaving machines and knitting machines going back to the late 17th century. And all the other things. No, this Europe is like nothing in Asia and the misfortune of the Asians is that their rulers thought they had everything they needed and didn't need to learn this stuff. And, so, even when they do learn it and encounter it, and, for instance, the Europeans start exporting textiles to India where they had once imported these things. So, we're talking 19th century, already, when they start doing it. The Indians don't come up with the machines to match them, not until past the middle of the century, do we see the first Indian textile machinery. So, something you see here is very different about these two societies and I don't see anything about what's going on in India that would give me any confidence that they would have done this if there had never been a contact with the British and they had not learned about these things from the British. They show no tendency...
Andre Gunder Frank: Oh, but they did.
David Landes: ...in that direction. No they didn't.
Andre Gunder Frank: Well, they dominated the world textile market until 1816.
David Landes: Yeah, but not using machines. They were getting cheap labor, right. So, and I think, you know, you may want to call that a hold.
Andre Gunder Frank: You were promised the last word.
David Landes: So, I just had it.
Andre Gunder Frank: Well, you might need me to have one and then maybe you can get another laugh.
David Landes: He wants another word.
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
