Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site utcs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsri!utcs!clarke
From: clarke@utcs.UUCP
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: egg/chicken chicken/egg chigg/eckin
Message-ID: <708@utcs.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 21-Jun-85 14:04:28 EDT
Article-I.D.: utcs.708
Posted: Fri Jun 21 14:04:28 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 21-Jun-85 14:47:26 EDT
References: <893@mnetor.UUCP> <5642@utzoo.UUCP> <896@mnetor.UUCP> <5710@utzoo.UUCP> <704@utcs.UUCP> <295@looking.UUCP>
Reply-To: clarke@utcs.UUCP (Jim Clarke)
Organization: University of Toronto - General Purpose UNIX
Lines: 19
Summary: 

In article <295@looking.UUCP> brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) writes:
>People were not grabbed out of their farms and forced to work long hours
>in the factories.  They decided to do it because it was a better offer
>than they got elsewhere....
>
>Just remember when you claim that modern society was built on the backs
>of exploited workers that those same people lined up to be exploited
>wherever they could.

Of course, the deal they got "elsewhere" was agricultural work with the
previous generation of rotten, nasty capitalists.  Well, "feudalists"?

Maybe one reason why the early industrialists were such bastards (and they
were, too -- the British reformed their mines and factories faster, once
they had found out what was going on, than they had abolished slavery) was
that they had to be bastards at home in order to be bastards abroad later?

I don't know.  I doubt that anyone on this net does.  Any economic historians
out there?