 Why was there no capitalism in early modern China?Tiago Nasser Appel () Brazilian Journal of Political Economy, 2017, vol. 37, issue 1, 167-188 Abstract: In this paper, we ask the following question: why couldn’t Early Modern China make the leap to capitalism, as we have come to know it in the West? We suggest that, even if China compared well with the West in key economic features – commercialization and commodification of goods, land, labor – up to the 18th century, it did not traverse the path to Capitalism because of the “fact of empire”. Lacking the scale of fiscal difficulties encountered in Early Modern Europe, Late Imperial China did not have to heavily tax merchants and notables; therefore, it did not have to negotiate rights and duties with the mercantile class. More innovatively, we also propose that the relative lack of fiscal difficulties meant that China failed to develop a “virtuous symbiosis” between taxing, monetization of the economy and public debt. This is because, essentially, it was the mobilization of society’s resources – primarily by way of public debt or taxes – towards the support of a military force that created the first real opportunities for merchants and bankers to amass immense and unprecedented wealth. JEL Classification: N; H2; F5. Keywords: Imperial China; capitalism; early modern Europe; Fernand Braudel; José Luís Fiori. (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ekm:repojs:v:37:y:2017:i:1:p:167-188:id:111 Access Statistics for this article More articles in Brazilian Journal of Political Economy from Center of Political Economy |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.