Hello everyone! We were recently given a this debate prompt in AP United States History:
This House believes that:
The Industrial Revolution was more important than The Market Revolution to the growth of the United States in the 19th c.
I was given the task of arguing that this prompt is untrue. So, here is the speech which I wrote:
Image Source: Pixabay.com, License CC0, Public Domain
Image Source: Pixabay.com, License CC0, Public DomainGreetings my most esteemed colleagues. The market revolution was the vast enhancement of the national economy through the development of more efficient trade routes and methods of trade. In the next few minutes, I will discuss why this “market revolution” was much more significant than the industrial revolution. In the following speech I will discuss the job diversity that arises from a stronger national economy, the devices necessary to achieve efficiency in productivity, and the concept of pricing.
In the first book of The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith discusses the difference in markets, and that difference’s effect on trade. He states “A porter, for example, can find employment and subsistence in no other place [Than a city]. A village is by much too narrow a sphere for him; even an ordinary market town is scarce large enough to afford him constant occupation.” - Book 1, Chapter 3, Page 27. A great point emerges that a career or skillset that does not fit the expectations or needs of the local market is not a career or skillset worth pursuing. However, thanks to the market revolution, this was not always the case. The market revolution created a stronger national market through an expansion of efficiency in regards to transportation. A stronger national market means a more diverse range of jobs for people in different regions. For example, lobsters were practically worthless in New England due to their abundance. When it became possible to trade them on a national scale, their value increased tremendously due to the demand for them in regions that do not have lobsters. This means that because of a stronger national market, a man who wished to pursue lobster farming, had the means and the incentive to do so. This creation of a market which allowed for and created a natural ecosystem of jobs, each with its own share of more or less precedence, allowed for what has become the American dream. The fact that you could choose to learn a skillset which your community mocks you for, but the national market rewards you for doing well was revolutionary. Something which arose from this job diversity created by the Market revolution is the United States’ dominance in the global market. We became a super power in trade due to our diverse array of pursuance of careers. The market revolution is what originally incentivized this expansion of jobs which helped us to succeed on a global level.
In the Wealth of Nations, Smith speaks of three devices which are necessary in order to achieve efficiency in productivity: the dexterity of the worker (also known as specialization), the division of labor, and the use of machinery. It is quite obvious that the expansion of the job market, created by the market revolution, is what allowed for the different specialist career types that the industrial revolution required. It created an incentive to learning specific skillsets and therefore becoming a much more efficient worker. The remarkable size of the market created by the market revolution also allowed for the vast amount of labor division that the industrial revolution required. To paraphrase Smith, “because a division of labor comes from the power of exchange, the extent of that power is the extent of the division of labor. Meaning that however effective a market may be is also how effective dividing labor is (Taken from cmp2020 Steemit article which discusses chapter 3).” This means that the vast amounts of labor division that occurred in the industrial revolution, would not have been possible without the vast national market created by the Market Revolution. Machinery can only be developed in an economy that incentivizes its development. Without the expansion of trade routes created by the market revolution, inventors would not have been incentivized to create machines to manufacture the goods incentivized by the industrial revolution. It is because the goods could be traded that more efficient ways to produce these goods were sought.
Another point which must be addressed is the market’s necessity in deciding the values of goods, aka prices. Think of the market as the brain which decides which products are valued, and the industrial methods as the muscles which work towards achieving these ideas created by the brain. Without the market as brain, industrialization would be completely pointless as it would not be known which products are valuable, and which products are not valuable. The market revolution enhanced the market greatly, allowing for much more clarity in which goods would be beneficial to work towards producing.
In truth, the relationship between the Industrial revolution and the Market revolution is a symbiotic relationship. They are intertwined in history. However, the Market revolution created a stable environment in which the Industrial revolution could thrive. The Market revolution gave people the incentive necessary in order to achieve their dreams, creating a highly diverse array of jobs, and giving the United States the ability to compete competently in the global market; it is at the roots of all three devices necessary to achieve efficiency in productivity; and it is the brain behind the muscle that is the industrial revolution. It is for these reasons that the Market revolution holds more significance in history than the Industrial revolution.
Closing
I just realized that all we really had to argue was that they were both equally important in history for the prompt to be incorrect. I'm sad that I missed that one. However, please let me know what you thought of this speech. I look forward to reading your opinions. See you later!
(Note) In order to encourage meaningful feedback on the platform, I will check comment trails of users who leave superficial comments (ie "Awesome post," or "Upvoted.") and will mute any users who exhibit a pattern of leaving "spammy" comments.