Gentlemanly capitalism in New Zealand

A. G. Hopkins

Australian Economic History Review, 2003, vol. 43, issue 3, 287-297

Abstract: This article responds to McAloon's contribution to this journal criticising the argument advanced by P.J. Cain and myself in British Imperialism. McAloon's research on Canterbury and Otago merits serious attention, but it is argued here that he is mistaken in claiming that it disproves the case we made for applying our concept of gentlemanly capitalism to New Zealand. Both the structure of ‘settler capitalism’ and the social characteristics of the settlers themselves provide a good fit with our interpretation. Nevertheless, McAloon deserves credit for putting this subject on the agenda, and it is to be hoped that other historians of New Zealand (and also of Australia) will now reconsider the relationship between the ‘rules of the game’ established by the imperial centre and the degrees of dependence experienced by the constituent parts of the empire.

Date: 2003
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1467-8446.2003.00055.x

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:ozechr:v:43:y:2003:i:3:p:287-297

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0004-8992

Access Statistics for this article

Australian Economic History Review is currently edited by Stephen L Morgan and Martin Shanahan

More articles in Australian Economic History Review from Economic History Society of Australia and New Zealand Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().