Historical arguments Flashcards
(11 cards)
Historical arguments:
- Early American Industrialisation (19th Century)
- Counter-argument to tariffs: The text argues that America’s initial industrial gains were due to pirated British technology and the welcoming of European talent, not protectionism.
- Evidence: It highlights figures like Samuel Slater (who memorised British textile machinery designs) and Francis Cabot Lowell (who replicated power-loom technology), as well as waves of European craftsmen and engineers.
- Critique of tariffs: It states that while the 1807 embargo did encourage small-scale textile mills, these were “persistently inefficient” and “collapsed once trade resumed” because they couldn’t compete with British imports.
Historical arguments:
* Japanese Competition (late 20th Century):
- Similarity to current concerns: The text draws a parallel between current fears about Chinese imports and past fears about Japanese competition in the 1980s.
- Reason for Japanese success: It asserts that Japan’s manufacturing edge came from innovation (lean-production techniques like Toyota’s just-in-time system) and refining foreign inventions, not unfair trade practices.
- America’s recovery: America regained its technological edge by embracing global economic integration, specifically through Silicon Valley’s pivot to innovation, design, and software development, and offshoring assembly to low-cost East Asian manufacturers. This cut costs and neutralised Japan’s competitive edge.
- Britain’s Post-War History:
- Cautionary tale of isolation: Britain’s decision to remain outside the European Economic Community (EEC) until 1973 is presented as a negative example of shielding domestic industries.
- Consequences: This led to “persistently low productivity growth” and allowed “widespread cartelisation,” causing Britain to fall behind more open and competitive economies like West Germany and France.
What is the counter-argument to tariffs regarding early American industrialisation?
America’s initial industrial gains were due to pirated British technology and the welcoming of European talent, not protectionism.
This highlights the importance of innovation and knowledge transfer in early industrial growth.
Which figures are highlighted as examples of leveraging British technology in early American industrialisation?
- Samuel Slater
- Francis Cabot Lowell
Samuel Slater memorised British textile machinery designs, while Francis Cabot Lowell replicated power-loom technology.
What was the critique of tariffs in relation to small-scale textile mills during the 1807 embargo?
Small-scale textile mills were ‘persistently inefficient’ and ‘collapsed once trade resumed’ due to inability to compete with British imports.
This indicates that protectionism alone did not lead to sustainable industrial growth.
What parallel is drawn between Japanese competition in the 1980s and current concerns about Chinese imports?
Both periods reflect fears about foreign competition undermining domestic industries.
This highlights a recurring theme in economic discourse regarding global competition.
What contributed to Japan’s manufacturing success in the late 20th century?
Innovation through lean-production techniques like Toyota’s just-in-time system and refining foreign inventions.
This success was not attributed to unfair trade practices.
How did America regain its technological edge over Japan?
By embracing global economic integration, pivoting to innovation, design, and software development, and offshoring assembly to low-cost East Asian manufacturers.
This strategy cut costs and neutralised Japan’s competitive advantage.
What is presented as a cautionary tale regarding Britain’s post-war history?
Britain’s decision to remain outside the European Economic Community (EEC) until 1973.
This decision is linked to negative economic outcomes.
What were the consequences of Britain’s isolation from the EEC?
- Persistently low productivity growth
- Widespread cartelisation
- Falling behind more open and competitive economies like West Germany and France
These consequences highlight the dangers of protectionist policies.