Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.04 AVERAGE
4.04 AVERAGE
This book suffers from what a lot of other books on political theory do, it’s written in the form of references to other works by other philosophers and theorists.
At a certain point, you need to stop and really evaluate what you’re saying and why it needs five separate examples to other works to say it.
It’s convoluted and frankly, I’m not willing to waste my time trying to parse through it all to get to the point.
At a certain point, you need to stop and really evaluate what you’re saying and why it needs five separate examples to other works to say it.
It’s convoluted and frankly, I’m not willing to waste my time trying to parse through it all to get to the point.
informative
reflective
medium-paced
dark
informative
sad
fast-paced
informative
slow-paced
challenging
informative
slow-paced
i was listening to the audiobook version and kind of lost track of what was going on. All very theoretical, but, frankly, the logic behind why capitalism didn't necessarily have to occur wasn't particularly interesting to me.
In which Wood is at great pains to remind us that capitalism is not a natural force or state but a historically-specific set of market imperatives. Amen.
She is less convincing when arguing that the root of this society lies not in cities or industrialism but in the rent practices of the English countryside, largely because a lot of these sections seem to default to “read about this in my other, lengthier books.” This under-200-page volume is caught in some weird middle ground between pamphlet/article and book, and functions mostly as a quick overview to Wood’s thought in general, I think - which is fine, but not the way the book is presented.
On the other hand, I am now definitely interested in reading her more substantive books, so...
She is less convincing when arguing that the root of this society lies not in cities or industrialism but in the rent practices of the English countryside, largely because a lot of these sections seem to default to “read about this in my other, lengthier books.” This under-200-page volume is caught in some weird middle ground between pamphlet/article and book, and functions mostly as a quick overview to Wood’s thought in general, I think - which is fine, but not the way the book is presented.
On the other hand, I am now definitely interested in reading her more substantive books, so...
Capitalism is not the inevitable expression of the human race. It's not the destination of history. It's the result of specific conditions in relation to property, that gave rise to explicit "market imperatives", and set off the capitalist "laws of motion".
It's a great book, and you can read it without any prior knowledge about how to analyse the history of capitalism.
Doesn't go very deep into what capitalism is today, though. The big ugly beast of today is even more vile!
It's a great book, and you can read it without any prior knowledge about how to analyse the history of capitalism.
Doesn't go very deep into what capitalism is today, though. The big ugly beast of today is even more vile!
challenging
informative
slow-paced
“ [...] the capitalist system’s unique capacity, and need, for self-sustaining growth has never been incompatible with regular stagnation and economic downturns [...] the very same logic that drives the system forward makes it inevitably susceptible to economic instabilities, which require constant ‘extra-economic’ interventions, if not to control them then to at least to compensate for their destructive effects.” (193)
This book follows the origin of capitalism from the various economic, social, and political conditions that enabled it. Wood extensively covers European feudalism, agrarian capitalism, industrial capitalism, and capitalist imperialism. Much of this is supported with comparatives of relevant scholars and economic systems throughout the centuries. Concepts of private property, productivity, wealth, and wage-labor are present in many different historical periods, but influenced the formation of capitalism in very distinct & specific ways. There are many chapters that certainly do well-articulate the specific characteristics of capitalism versus other systems and relationships of exploitation and greed.
I had initially thought this book was going to be written with more of an introductory approach—it really isn’t that. This book requires its reader to be familiar with Marxism and other economic theories. I believe wholeheartedly that this book could have talked about what they did, while also avoiding unnecessary wording and while they explained these concepts through the book. I don’t even think it needed to be as dense as it was to fulfill its mission.
Despite these faults, I was still pleased to see instances in which concepts I had understood in practice were defined on paper. I do think Woods has an incredible understanding and has a good collection of references, as well as some engaging commentary. Unfortunately, this falls short when she doesn’t lean on her own analysis enough.
This book was both very draining and informative. It does not need to be as dense as it is, and it could’ve been written in a way that was so much more engaging.
I would love to hear more from Woods herself. 🥲 A larger understanding throughout this book is by describing the conditions that created capitalism, readers can see that capitalism is not inevitable, and it is not unstoppable. This was a powerful point and should have been honed on.
This book expects you to come to it with extensive knowledge on European economic systems and scholars through the centuries it covers. While this pushed me to look into information I hadn’t known of before, it often just becomes a drag to re-read something solely because of the author’s obtuse language. The writing style is oftentimes very stagnant. I don’t think that academic language itself is inherently harmful, but many of this author's choices were unnecessary to me.
Also: Fuck John Locke 🖕
This book follows the origin of capitalism from the various economic, social, and political conditions that enabled it. Wood extensively covers European feudalism, agrarian capitalism, industrial capitalism, and capitalist imperialism. Much of this is supported with comparatives of relevant scholars and economic systems throughout the centuries. Concepts of private property, productivity, wealth, and wage-labor are present in many different historical periods, but influenced the formation of capitalism in very distinct & specific ways. There are many chapters that certainly do well-articulate the specific characteristics of capitalism versus other systems and relationships of exploitation and greed.
I had initially thought this book was going to be written with more of an introductory approach—it really isn’t that. This book requires its reader to be familiar with Marxism and other economic theories. I believe wholeheartedly that this book could have talked about what they did, while also avoiding unnecessary wording and while they explained these concepts through the book. I don’t even think it needed to be as dense as it was to fulfill its mission.
Despite these faults, I was still pleased to see instances in which concepts I had understood in practice were defined on paper. I do think Woods has an incredible understanding and has a good collection of references, as well as some engaging commentary. Unfortunately, this falls short when she doesn’t lean on her own analysis enough.
This book was both very draining and informative. It does not need to be as dense as it is, and it could’ve been written in a way that was so much more engaging.
I would love to hear more from Woods herself. 🥲 A larger understanding throughout this book is by describing the conditions that created capitalism, readers can see that capitalism is not inevitable, and it is not unstoppable. This was a powerful point and should have been honed on.
This book expects you to come to it with extensive knowledge on European economic systems and scholars through the centuries it covers. While this pushed me to look into information I hadn’t known of before, it often just becomes a drag to re-read something solely because of the author’s obtuse language. The writing style is oftentimes very stagnant. I don’t think that academic language itself is inherently harmful, but many of this author's choices were unnecessary to me.
Also: Fuck John Locke 🖕
A short book, packed dense with ideas and information, and presented phenomenally clearly.
The book clearly handles and expounds upon its title subject matter: how did capitalism start, and why? In the process it shows how capitalism is not the inevitable result of having enough people, enough money or magically being rid of some anti-capitalistic barriers.
By challenging these assumptions around capitalism I found a lot of my assumptions challenged, reasonably and clearly. For those who are interested in understanding capitalism well, this is a lucid, valuable introduction to that topic. Even if you have not approached the topic before.
The book clearly handles and expounds upon its title subject matter: how did capitalism start, and why? In the process it shows how capitalism is not the inevitable result of having enough people, enough money or magically being rid of some anti-capitalistic barriers.
By challenging these assumptions around capitalism I found a lot of my assumptions challenged, reasonably and clearly. For those who are interested in understanding capitalism well, this is a lucid, valuable introduction to that topic. Even if you have not approached the topic before.