Connect with us

Business

This Harvard professor spent 8 years traveling the world researching the secret history of capitalism and how ‘marginal’ and ‘weak’ it used to be

Published

on



Sven Beckert isn’t here to judge capitalism, even though he just wrote a provocative, ambitious, 1,300-page book on its history. As he writes several times in the book (which this editor has read), he’s not even sure what it is. He’s trying to understand it.

The Harvard professor, who Zoomed in to talk to Fortune from his home office in Cambridge, Mass., explained that his new book, Capitalism: A Global History, is the product of an eight-year odyssey to seek understanding of the way we actually live out our economic lives. “Often, when I teach the history of capitalism here at Harvard, many of my students think that capitalism is kind of the state of nature.” But that’s just not the case when you look at the historical record, he added.

When pressed to explain what his book accomplishes, he said it’s two-pronged: to offer a more global perspective on the history of capitalism and to “denaturalize” the history of whatever capitalism is. Capitalism is neither eternal nor natural, in Beckert’s telling; itʼs a human invention that spread and evolved over centuries through deliberate choices, sometimes extraordinary violence, and incredible institutional innovation. Capitalism rose from the margins of medieval trade to dominate modern life, and so it could also, someday, fade or transform again.

These may be considered bold claims by some who take capitalism’s primacy as inevitable, but the book has been generally well reviewed. Although some critics have taken shots at it for being a bit of a “doorstop,” like Beckert’s previous tome, the Pulitzer finalist, award-winning The Empire of Cotton, the ambition and narrative boldness of this global history have been generally praised. 

In the Boston Globe, Hamilton Cain wrote that Beckert weaves a sprawling tapestry that “unfurls with the suspense and intricacy of a detective novel,” with capitalism’s ascendance reading a bit like a crime story, even a whodunit. Adrian Woolridge of Bloomberg Opinion criticized it for nearly the identical thing, saying that the book “ignores [the] secret sauce” of innovation, focusing more on its exploitative history than on how it created new value. Beckert insisted that his book is all about the question of how, not why. He attempted to chart “how we get from a world in which this logic exists, but it’s marginal, to a world in the year 2025, where [it] almost structures all of our economic life—and almost all of our lives.”

From marginal to dominant

Beckert told Fortune that his research showed traces of capitalist logic can be seen in the historical record as far back as 1,000 years ago, but for hundreds of years it “remained marginal to economic life.” In his book, he talks many times of “islands” and “nodes,” as capitalists were at first outsiders, regarded as almost freakish by people who lived their life without the constant accumulation of more money to invest. Then, when the tide started to turn and capitalism became ascendant, in the last 500 years, the islands and nodes shifted to the holdouts from the capitalist way of life, like the farmers of the 20th century. 

“The first thing I always say is that capitalism is not the same as the existence of markets,” Beckert said. He pointed out that “economic life” existed for all of human history, but not the relentless accumulation and reinvestment of capital, which was practiced by a few merchant communities on the outskirts of society. Capitalism “has existed in many different parts of the world,” Beckert insisted, “but it was also rather thinly spread and rather weak … This kind of capitalist logic that is so crucial to economic life today, that is something relatively novel.”

Beckert points out in his book that until the fall of the USSR in the late 1980s, something like 30% of the world was living in a non-capitalist system, and much of the rural west was able to avoid the capitalist way of life by, for example, growing their own food as subsistence farmers. (Tom Lee of Fundstrat recently compared the emergence of artificial intelligence to flash-frozen food in the 1920s, which changed the composition of the economy from 40% subsistence farmers to just 2%.)

The professor highlighted ancient mercantile communities of capitalists in unexpected places such as the Port of Aden, in Yemen, or Cambay, in modern Gujarat, India. Goods were traded across oceans from Aden as early as 1150, he finds, while Song-dynasty China invented paper money centuries before Europe; and textiles thrived in ancient Indian hubs ages before the Industrial Revolution. But these capitalists were encircled for hundreds of years by a sea of subsistence farmers and tributary empires that operated on completely different principles. “The extremely global nature of early merchant communities, that was something that I, broadly speaking, I did have a sense of,” Beckert said, but hadn’t put together in quite this way before.

“They were always connected to a state,” Beckert said of the early merchants, but they were also freewheeling and kind of separate from that state,” he said, that is, until things drastically changed in the 19th century. Beckert highlights the disturbing case of Hermann Röchling, the German steel industrialist who saw such capitalist opportunities that he closely allied himself with successive German governments and found himself “on trial for war crimes, not just in one war, but in two wars, World War I and World War II, which must be a world historical record.”

How capitalism moved to the center

To illustrate just how unnatural the capitalist logic was once considered, Beckert’s book highlights the odd case of Robert Keayne, a Puritan merchant in 1639 Boston. Keayne was dragged before a court and church elders nearly 400 years ago, but not for stealing. Instead it was for the “very evil” practice of selling goods for a profit that exceeded community standards. He was nearly excommunicated for behaving in a way that is now considered the basic function of business. It would take centuries, Beckert argues, for the “covetous” accumulation of wealth to be rebranded as a public good, or in other words, for capitalism to be regarded as normal.

For his part, Beckert insisted that he’s not trying to judge capitalism, even if some harsh judgments emerge throughout his book. “The ability to write this book is, of course, itself an outcome of the capitalist revolution,” he told Fortune, arguing that at this juncture in the 21st century, the logic of capitalism has brought enormous productivity gains, unprecedented economic growth and made many people much wealthier. He wouldn’t be able to fly to Barbados or Cambodia for research without it, he acknowledged.

And Beckert did travel far and wide over eight years to dig up what he regards as a kind of secret history of the origins of capitalism. From the dusty outskirts of Phnom Penh to the archives of the Godrej company in India to the relics of the sugar plantations of Barbados (where he spent 10 days), Beckert surprised himself again and again by what he found. 

When the American colonies emerge on the scene, for example, more than a third of the way into his narrative, Beckert points out that West Indies were much more central to global capitalism than the 13 territories that would become the United States. The city of Boston, he notes, might have perished if it didn’t figure out how to become a service hub for Barbados, whose sugar plantations generated huge revenues. “That’s also kind of an amazing story,” Beckert agreed. “For us, Barbados is a foreign country and it’s far away, but for them [Bostonians in the early 1700s], it was also part of the British empire. And then it was … kind of a suburb to Boston—or vice versa. They were tightly integrated with one another.”

Beckert said he was surprised in what his research turned up of the darkness of capitalism’s past. “I did know a lot about the history of slavery, but being on this island and then reading the historical records and reading the kind of horrific accounts of what happened on this island in the 1600s, that was also not really surprising, but it was really quite shocking, the degree of violence that I found within this history.”

Could capitalism end?

Beckert told Fortune that he believes the world is currently in a “moment of transition,” similar to the shift that occurred in the 1970s when the Keynesian order gave way to neoliberalism. One of the largest surprises of the book is at its very conclusion, when he suggested that someday, capitalism could end. The fact that “it rests on the ever expanding accumulation of capital” implies that somehow, someway, the capital will run out. “In the distant future,” he writes, historians will look back at our times and “find it difficult to understand our ways of thinking, our ways of being.”

Ultimately, Beckert said he views his book not as a moral tale with capitalism as the villain, but as an investigation into human agency. By revealing that capitalism was once fragile, marginal, and weak—and that it required centuries of specific political choices, violence, and institutional building to become dominant—he hopes to show that the future remains unwritten. “This is not like a machine that kind of unfolds on its own,” Beckert said. “This is a human-created order.”

As the global economy faces new shocks in the mid-2020s, Beckert’s history offers a reminder: The economy is not a force of nature. It was made by people, and it can be remade by them. “The future is open,” he told Fortune. “People build a word that’s different from the word that they were born into [and] sometimes the least powerful have made a huge difference in the trajectory of the development of capitalism. So, I think that is important to see at the contemporary moment.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Electricity as the new eggs: Affordability concerns will swing the midterms just like the 2024 election, Bill McKibben says

Published

on



That sun has provided him cheap power for 25 years, and this month he installed his fourth iteration of solar panels on his Vermont home. In an interview after he set up the new system, he said President Donald Trump’s stance against solar and other cheap green energy will hurt the GOP in this year’s elections as electricity bills rise.

After the Biden and Obama administrations subsidized and championed solar, wind and other green power as answers to fight climate change, Trump has tried to dampen those and turn to older and dirtier fossil fuels. The Trump administration froze five big offshore wind projects last month but judges this week allowed three of the projects to resume. Federal clean energy tax incentives expired on Dec. 31 that include installing home solar panels.

Meanwhile, electricity prices are rising in the United States, and McKibben is counting on that to trigger political change.

“I think you’re starting to see that have a big political impact in the U.S. right now. My prediction would be that electric prices are going to be to the 2026 election what egg prices were to the 2024 election,” said McKibben, an author and founder of multiple environmental and activist groups. Everyday inflation hurt Democrats in the last presidential race, analysts said.

The Trump administration and a bipartisan group of governors on Friday tried to step up pressure on the operator of the nation’s largest electric grid to take urgent steps to boost power supplies in the mid-Atlantic and keep electricity bills from rising even higher.

“Ensuring the American people have reliable and affordable electricity is one of President Trump’s top priorities,” said White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers.

Renewable energy prices drop around the world

Globally, the price of wind and solar power is plummeting to the point that they are cheaper than fossil fuels, the United Nations found. And China leads the world in renewable energy technology, with one of its electric car companies passing Tesla in annual sales.

“We can’t economically compete in a world where China gets a lot of cheap energy and we have to pay for really expensive energy,” McKibben told The Associated Press, just after he installed a new type of solar panels that can hang on balconies with little fuss.

When Trump took office in January 2025, the national average electricity cost was 15.94 cents per kilowatt-hour. By September it was up to 18.07 cents and then down slightly to 17.98 cents in October, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

That’s a 12.8% increase in 10 months. It rose more in 10 months than the previous two years. People in Maryland, New Jersey and Maine have seen electricity prices rise at a rate three times higher than the national average since October 2024.

At 900 kilowatt-hours per month, that means the average monthly electricity bill is about $18 more than in January 2025.

Democrats blame Trump for rising electric bills

This week, Democrats on Capitol Hill blamed rising electric bills on Trump and his dislike of renewable energy.

“From his first day in office, he’s made it his mission to limit American’s access to cheap energy, all in the name of increasing profits for his friends in the fossil fuel industry. As a result, energy bills across the country have skyrocketed,” Illinois Rep. Sean Casten said at a Wednesday news conference.

“Donald Trump is the first president to intentionally raise the price of something that we all need,” Hawaii Sen. Brian Schatz, also a Democrat, said Wednesday on the Senate floor. “Nobody should be enthused about paying more for electricity, and this national solar ban is making everybody pay more. Clean is cheap and cheap is clean.”

Solar panels on McKibben’s Vermont home

McKibben has been sending excess electricity from his solar panels to the Vermont grid for years. Now he’s sending more.

As his dog, Birke, stood watch, McKibben, who refers to his home nestled in the Green Mountains of Vermont as a “museum of solar technology” got his new panels up and running in about 10 minutes. This type of panel from the California-based firm Bright Saver is often referred to as plug-in solar. Though it’s not yet widely available in the U.S., McKibben pointed to the style’s popularity in Europe and Australia.

“Americans spend three or four times as much money as Australians or Europeans to put solar panels on the roof. We have an absurdly overcomplicated permitting system that’s unlike anything else on the rest of the planet,” McKibben said.

McKibben said Australians can obtain three hours of free electricity each day through a government program because the country has built so many solar panels.

“And I’m almost certain that that’s an argument that every single person in America would understand,” he said. “I don’t know anyone who wouldn’t say: ‘I’d like three free hours of electricity.’”

__

Swinhart reported from Vermont. Borenstein reported from Washington. Matthew Daly contributed to this report from Washington.

__

The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Epstein files fight in court heats up as congressmen accuse DOJ of ‘serious misconduct’

Published

on



Manhattan’s top federal prosecutor said Friday that a judge lacks the authority to appoint a neutral expert to oversee the public release of documents in the sex trafficking probe of financier Jeffrey Epstein and British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell.

Judge Paul A. Engelmayer was told in a letter signed by U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton that he must reject a request this week by the congressional cosponsors of the Epstein Files Transparency Act to appoint a neutral expert.

U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna, a California Democrat, and Rep. Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican, say they have “urgent and grave concerns” about the slow release of only a small number of millions of documents that began last month.

In a filing to the judge they said they believed “criminal violations have taken place” in the release process.

Clayton, though, said Khanna and Massie do not have standing with the court that would allow them to seek the “extraordinary” relief of the appointment of a special master and independent monitor.

Engelmayer “lacks the authority” to grant such a request, he said, particularly because the congressional representatives who made the request are not parties to the criminal case that led to Maxwell’s December 2021 sex trafficking conviction and subsequent 20-year prison sentence for recruiting girls and women for Epstein to abuse and aiding the abuse.

Khanna said Clayton’s response “misconstrued” the intent of their request.

“We are informing the Court of serious misconduct by the Department of Justice that requires a remedy, one we believe this Court has the authority to provide, and which victims themselves have requested,” Khanna said in a statement.

“Our purpose is to ensure that DOJ complies with its representations to the Court and with its legal obligations under our law,” he added.

Epstein died in a federal jail in New York City in August 2019 as he awaited trial on sex trafficking charges. The death was ruled a suicide.

The Justice Department expects to update the court “again shortly” regarding its progress in turning over documents from the Epstein and Maxwell investigative files, Clayton said in the letter.

The Justice Department has said the files’ release was slowed by redactions required to protect the identities of abuse victims.

In their letter, Khanna and Massie wrote that the Department of Justice’s release of only 12,000 documents out of more than 2 million documents being reviewed was a “flagrant violation” of the law’s release requirements and had caused “ serious trauma to survivors.”

“Put simply, the DOJ cannot be trusted with making mandatory disclosures under the Act,” the congressmen said as they asked for the appointment of an independent monitor to ensure all documents and electronically stored information are immediately made public.

They also recommended that a court-appointed monitor be given authority to prepare reports about the true nature and extent of the document production and whether improper redactions or conduct have taken place.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

See the face of ICE’s crackdown on normal Americans: a 21-year-old college student permanently blind in one eye

Published

on



A 21-year-old college student who said he was blinded in one eye by a projectile fired by a federal officer during a Southern California protest said he faces a drastically different life now.

Kaden Rummler said in an interview that he was in agonizing pain and underwent an extensive six-hour surgery to his left eye after he was injured at a Jan. 9 protest over the fatal shooting of a woman by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer in Minneapolis. Rummler said he has no depth perception and can no longer drive. Shards of metal and a nickel-sized piece of plastic remain lodged in his skull, his attorney said, and he is considering suing.

“It’s going to affect every aspect of my life,” said Rummler, who hopes to pursue a career in forestry.

A second demonstrator at the same protest outside a federal immigration building in Orange County told the Los Angeles Times he was also blinded in one eye by a projectile fired by federal agents. Britain Rodriguez, 31, said he was standing on steps outside the immigration building when he was struck in the face.

“I remember hitting the ground and feeling like my eye exploded in my head,” Rodriguez told the newspaper.

The Department of Homeland Security didn’t respond to questions from The Associated Press about what type of projectile was used. Tricia McLaughlin, assistant secretary for the agency, said in an emailed statement this week that the protesters were violent and that two officers were injured but didn’t specify the extent of their injuries. DHS said one demonstrator was taken to the hospital with a cut. McLaughlin confirmed to the Times that was a reference to Rummler and called his injury claims “absurd.”

Rummler has been charged with a misdemeanor count of disorderly conduct. One of his fellow protesters was jailed for several days and has been charged with assaulting, resisting or impeding a federal officer.

Rummler’s attorney John Washington said doctors want to know whether the materials in the projectile could be toxic but have been unable to get answers from DHS. Washington said based on their preliminary investigation they believe it was a capsule made from metal and plastic containing pepper spray.

The injuries in California are the latest in a growing number of violent encounters between federal agents and community members during protests over the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown.

Federal immigration agents deployed to Minneapolis have used aggressive crowd-control tactics that have become a dominant concern after the deadly shooting of Renee Good.

In Santa Ana, California, hundreds of people marched in the streets on Jan. 9 to protest Good’s killing. A smaller group later congregated outside the federal immigration building, shouting expletives through megaphones about ICE, according to video taken by OC Hawk, a group that films breaking news in Orange County.

The video shows a handful of officers in riot gear standing guard and urging demonstrators to move back. An orange cone is later seen rolling onto a plaza outside the building, and authorities begin firing crowd-control projectiles as they walk toward the crowd.

In the video, an officer is seen grabbing a protester by the arm and Rummler and a few others are seen stepping forward shouting in response. An officer then fires a crowd-control weapon, striking Rummler from several feet away. Rummler grabs his face and falls to the ground, and an officer grabs him by the shirt and drags him backward across the ground toward the building, the video shows. Later, video appears to show him face down on the ground being handcuffed.

Rummler said he joined the protest against immigration authorities because he can’t stand seeing families torn from their homes. Despite his injuries, he said he would do it again.

“I refuse to sit around idly and watch that happen, and in 50 years, I would absolutely regret not trying to make a change,” he said.

Washington, a civil rights lawyer, said his client could have been killed.

“Any officers with just the most basic training would know you don’t shoot someone ever in the face with this, but let alone at point-blank range, and that’s because it is a lethal weapon when used like that, and it very nearly was,” Washington said.

Geoffrey Alpert, a professor of criminology and criminal justice at University of South Carolina, said a thorough investigation is needed into the reason for using a high level of force in that situation.

“I don’t know of any projectile where you train to shoot at that close range,” Alpert said.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.