Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Mercantilism in the 18th century
Mercantilism in the 18th century
A century of mercantilism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Mercantilism is essentially economic nationalism, with a goal of economic prosperity. It controlled Western European thought between the 16th and 18th centuries, with economic powers like Britain, France and the Dutch Republic adopting mercantile policies to restrict imports and maximise exports. This was thought to be the foremost way to achieve a positive balance of trade, resulting in the amassing of gold and silver. Although mercantile policies were thought to bring wealth in the form of precious metals, many disagreed that this was the true measure of wealth, notably Adam Smith who argued that wealth is measured by what these metals purchase, such as commodities and a strong labour force (Smith, 2017). This essay will outline the main …show more content…
The Dutch Republic were still the most powerful economy at the time, nonetheless, by limiting colonial trade to only Britain, London could develop as a key hub for shipping services and became a major port for colonial trade (specifically American). This allowed the British economy to develop at a rapid rate in comparison to its colonies and the rest of the world, as their ships were being used worldwide and London was favoured for shipping instead of the Dutch Republic. The British were therefore able to develop their Royal Navy, which (after the Anglo-Dutch wars) was made easier to do so as the Dutch weren’t allowed a navy above sixty percent the size of theirs, so Britain was able to capitalise and use their navy to sustain strong economic growth. Even Adam Smith, who led the ‘attack on the Mercantile system’ agrees that this had a positive impact on Britain’s economic development and navy. Smith writes, “As defence, however, is of much more importance than opulence, the act of navigation is, perhaps, the wisest of all the commercial regulations of England.” (Smith, 2017). He argues that defence is a higher priority than wealth, and that the Navigation Acts had a very positive effect on the Royal Navy, so for him (in some respects) it may be a wise
Europe’s monopolization of the silver trade did not provide the continent with as much wealth as it had hoped, yet it still was the backbone of many european economies. The desperation of Europe to hold on to said industry led the nations involved to change their tactics from not only gaining wealth from Asia, but extracting it too. One of the main contributors to this shift in the pattern of the silver trade was Spain, as it monopolized the industry until the 17th century. The purpose of document 2 was to show others in the silver business that Spain was a strong and dominant force over the silver industry and perhaps to discourage chinese sale of goods in order to protect spanish domestic production. Spain did so by creating artwork that showcased Spanish technological advancement (doc 2) and by increasing the flow of information about Chinese affairs in the colonies to the Spanish crown (doc 4). Both of these tactics send a message to others in the silver business - Spain is best equipped to run the silver industry and any funny business will be reported to the crown. This set a precedent of unity and centrality, one of the most threatening features a civilization can possess. If a nation is unified, it can conquer others and protect itself. Circa 500 B.C.E., The Persian empire also utilized the flow of information to protect its
It was expected to result in a favorable balance of trade, with imports not exceeding exports. The significance of this term is that this system allowed gold and silver to flow into England, bringing economic expansion. As a result, these mercantile policies laid the ground for overseas colonization and allowed England to rise as a challenge to Spanish power in the New World.
In the Humanistic Tradition the author, Gloria Fiero introduces Adam smith as a Scottish moral philosopher, pioneer of political economy, and a key figure in the Scottish Enlightenment. Smith also known as the Father of Political economy, is best known for one of his two classic works An Inquiry into the nature and causes of the Wealth of Nations. Fiero looks at Smith’s work because the division of labor is important. One thing Smith thinks is even more important for creating a wealthy nation, is to interact and have open trade with different countries. Fiero states,“It is necessary, though very slow and gradual, consequence of a certain propensity in human nature which has in view no such extensive utility; the propensity to truck, barter,
Trade was a vital part of the economy of both England and the British colonies. The colonies would provide a majority of raw materials that would be shipped to England where then they would process raw materials into goods and sell them at markets provided by the colonies. Within this system both England and the colonies depended on each other for commerce. To further enforce this system on their oversees empire England enacted the Navigation Laws. In 1650 the first of these laws was aimed at keeping trade between the colonies limited only to their mother country, England. The law restricted trade of such shippers as the Dutch, by stating all goods must be transported on English vessels to or from the colonies. This helped keep money within British control, but also increased both England’s and the colonies’ merchant marine. Further laws were passed, but none that imposed strict regulations on the colonies. In fact the colonies received advantages from the mercantile system of England. As colonies of England they had the rights of Englishmen. They also had some opportunities of self-government. As compared economically to the average Englishmen of the time, the average American colonist was more often better off. In some markets, such as tobacco, the colonies had great advantages. Although not allowed to trade tobacco with any other country; they were guaranteed a monopoly on the English market. One of the major advantages of British imperialism was the protection supplied by the British army. With the strong soldiers providing defense against natives and other inter colonial disputes and the mighty British navy protecting their commerce on the seas; the colonies benefited from great advantages provided by their oversees “rulers';.
There are many disadvantages associated with starting their own branch in India. First is that this option is the most expensive. They would have to pay for all the marketing, equipment, building, manufacturing, production, and staffing that they would need to operate. Mercan Systems would not be able to share any costs with another company. The financial investment needed would depend on the number of regions they choose to operate in (two, four, or nationally) and if they use a direct salesforce or dealers, but it would still be significantly higher than any other alternative. Starting another branch in an international market that they do not already have a location in, is a large change and project to take on. It requires an immense amount
One facet of this unique system involved the numerous economic differences between England and the colonies. The English government subscribed to the economic theory of mercantilism, which demanded that the individual subordinate his economic activity to the interests of the state (Text, 49). In order to promote mercantilism in all her colonies, Great Britain passed the Navigation Acts in 1651, which controlled the output of British holdings by subsidizing. Under the Navigation Acts, each holding was assigned a product, and the Crown dictated the quantity to be produced. The West Indies, for example, were assigned sugar production and any other colony exporting sugar would face stiff penalties (Text, 50). This was done in order to ensure the economic prosperity of King Charles II, but it also served to restrict economic freedom. The geographical layout of the American colonies made mercantilism impractical there. The cit...
Mercantilism and capitalism both have to do with money accumulation. Capitalism are businesses controlled by private owners. Since they own the business and the government doesn’t all the profit from the work they’ve done and the trades they’ve made goes to them. Mercantilism are countries that are exporting more goods than their importing. In 17th and 18th century this system was used by British government to restrict how the colonies spent their money. Capitalism is the making of the money in a country, and mercantilism is making money from other
When comparing and contrasting the Northern and Southern colonies throughout their development, it is vital to fully understand that each colony differed as a result of their reasons for settlement, geographic setting, and economic establishment; however, the colonies were additionally equivalent with regards to their social perceptions and standards of mercantilism.
The wars with England and France threatened the national security of the Dutch Republic. According to document 1, a lot of naval battles between the English and the Dutch occurred on Dutch trade and fishing routes. The constant attacks were a threat to the national security because Dutch merchants and citizens were getting captured by foreign governments. The reason the English attacked the Dutch ships so much is to seize their ships. Document 3 shows that the English seized at least 1,500 more ships than the Dutch, who only seized 500. This means that the Dutch grew weaker as they lost their ships and their enemies, the English, grew stronger as they gained ships. The English could use their newly obtained ships to perform more naval attacks on the Dutch which further challenged the security of the provinces. Some merchants were afraid of sailing anymore and argued for free warships protection, like the anonymous merchant in document 5. This document shows that merchants were beginning to lose their faith in their government’s security and were worried about being attacked while trading. Attacks on merchant ships were not the only source of threat for the Dutch Re...
In a similar economic revolution, the colonies out grew their mercantile relationship with England and developed their own expanding capitalist system. The idea of a set amount of wealth in the world and that if one were to become wealthy, he or she had to take from someone who is already wealthy, is basically what mercantilism means.
After witnessing the Dutch Republic’s rise in becoming a dominating controller of European trade, other countries in the area were eager to be a part of the success – even if that meant using force. England attacked the Dutch in three Anglo-Dutch Wars between 1652 and 1674, according to Document 3. Compared to the five hundred English ships that the Dutch seized, the English took approximately two thousand Dutch ships. This loss to Dutch merchant shipping would not be easily recovered. It is clear by the battle markers shown in Document 1 that many English Battles for economic influence occurred near trade routes. Everyone was desperate for a chance to get in on the profitable trade. France even allied with England in the Treaty of Dover (Document 6) so that the “allied sovereigns [could] then jointly declare war on the Dutch Republic…” As an official treaty, Document 6 is a clear insight into the true and blatant violent intentions of the other nations to take out the Dutch Republic’s power in order to increase their own. It was strategic partner to take out the Dutch before they absorbed all the trade power – a win-win for the England and France. At the Amsterdam City Council, people were obviously biased toward the Dutch side of the war. However, their opinion that “other kings seem more and more to scheme how to ruin wh...
Before liberal economic views emerged, mercantilism was the economic doctrine the government practiced to protect his or her own domestic products. Voltaire’s quote explains the main goal of mercantilism, “It is clear ...
Smith's Influential work, The Wealth of Nations, was written based on the help with the country’s economy who bases it off his book. Smith’s book was mainly written on how inefficient mercantilism was...
Smith's formulation transcends a purely descriptive account of the transformations that shook eighteenth-century Europe. A powerful normative theory about the emancipatory character of market systems lies at the heart of Wealth of Nations. These markets constitute "the system of natural liberty" because they shatter traditional hierarchies, exclusions, and privileges.2 Unlike mercantilism and other alternative mechanisms of economic coordination, markets are based on the spontaneous and free expression of individual preferences. Rather than change, even repress, human nature to accord with an abstract bundle of values, market economies accept the propensities of humankind and are attentive to their character. They recognize and value its inclinations; not only human reason but the full panoply of individual aspirations and needs.3 Thus, for Smith, markets give full expression to individual, economic liberty.
England in the 17th century adopted the policy of mercantilism, exercising control over the trade of the colonies, thus greatly affecting their political and economical development. Mercantilism was the policy in Europe throughout the 1500's to the 1700's where the government of the mother country controlled the industry and trade of other, weaker settlements with the idea that national strength and economic security comes from exporting more than what is imported. Possession of colonies provided the countries with sources of raw materials and markets for their manufactured goods. This system had political and economical repercussions on the inflicted because it inspired many new laws and acts for the colonies, and it restricted the colonies trade to England, reducing the revenue that the colonies received.