Levi Fox
Page 1
2/16/2016
Capitalism and Conflict:
Economic Change and Societal Response in
Eighteenth Century England, Porfirian Mexico, and Early Twentieth Century Colombia
Eighteenth century England, Porfirian Mexico, and early twentieth century Colombia all went
through major societal changes during their respective periods. In all three cases the relations
between the upper and lower classes were sharply redrawn during this time, with increased
tension and violence often times the result. At the beginnings of these eras all three societies
experienced cordial relations between the classes, based upon shared traditions, and
interdependence. By the end of these periods, the classes no longer shared the same
philosophies, and began distrusting their counterparts. But what could cause such a radical shift
in class relations? In all three cases the answer lies in the emergence of capitalism. Moreover,
because of the lower classes historic support for the existing social system, it was only after the
upper classes were pushed by capitalism and its trappings to change societal relations that such
substantive changes were able to occur.
The changes in the relations between the upper and lower classes in England which took
place over the course of the eighteenth century is best illustrated by the changes in relations
concerning bread and bread riots. In 1700 the upper classes worked to keep the price of bread
reasonable by preventing middle class middlemen from making money at the lower classes
expense. Such actions on the part of the upper class reaffirmed the traditional alliance of upper
and lower class against middle class as well as serving to prevent lower class bread riots. And
even in cases when the upper classes did allow their responsibilities to go unperformed and the
lower classes did riot, these riots were never intended to cause substantive changes in the
prevailing social order, but simply to reaffirm the existing status quo. Furthermore, in 1700 the
upper classes would have seemed to recognize lower class riot (especially bread riot) as a valid
1
1
Levi Fox
Page 2
2/16/2016
2
form of expression, an accepted component of what E.P. Thompson calls “the moral economy”
and were quite lenient in their treatment of rioters.
This portrait contrasts sharply with English society in the early part of the nineteenth
century. By about 1800, based primarily upon the increased wealth and influence of the middle
class which was a result of capitalism, the upper classes had switched their support from lower
class to middle class. Thus they were the class which initially broke its social responsibilities.
Along with a change in upper class allegiances came a change in their philosophy, a shift from
moral economy to the new political economy espoused by Adam Smith. This new economic
philosophy was inextricably linked to capitalism and provided a justification for the upper
classes cessation of support for the lower classes.
Such an abandonment of the old social system forced the lower classes to alter their
responses as well. According to Thompson by “1812 traditional food riots overlap with
Luddism” (p 129). Riots during and after this time began to demand a change in the social order,
instead of seeking to preserve it. Further demonstrating the change which had taken place,
instead of acceptance of lower class action, increasingly the upper classes responded to riot with
violent repression. It is also notable that “such repression was legitimized… by the triumph of
the new ideology of political economy” (Thompson 129). Thusly, as a result of the growth of
capitalism in eighteenth century England (and especially the philosophy of political economy
that came with it) the upper classes stopped supporting the existing social system and cleared a
path for the emergence of a new set of relationships between upper and lower classes;
relationships marked by distrust and violence instead of cooperation and peace.
The transformation in social relations in Mexico during the Porfirian period can best be
viewed by looking at the changes in the traditional festival of the Judas Burnings. In the
2
Levi Fox
Page 3
2/16/2016
3
beginning of this period, and for many years before it, the Judas Day festivals had maintained a
certain structure and had performed a certain function in society. Traditionally these festivals
were done largely for the lower classes. While the upper classes did participate, the burnings
were a time of societal inversion, when the lower classes had the opportunity to eat well, be
entertained, and gingerly mock their social superiors without fear of reprisal. They performed
this mockery by modeling the Judases which were to be burned on members of the elite ruling
class. At the beginning of the Porfirian era, the upper classes recognized the importance of this
festival toward preserving social harmony, made no attempts to stop it, and even participated in
it themselves.
By 1893, however, the realities of society had changed to the point where the upper
classes could no longer understand the Judas day tradition. The differences between the Judas
day celebrations of 1893 and those before that year show the changes which had taken place in
society over this period. In 1893 the upper classes sponsored the event, thus changing their
participation and altering the tradition. They commissioned Judases to resemble the poor, thus
mocking the lower classes and removing the social inversion aspect of the tradition. In addition,
they heated up coins which were to be given out to the poor, and then laughed when the lower
classes were burned.
The upper classes thus transformed a festival which had existed for the
enjoyment of lower classes into one which was staged for their own amusement. After 1893 the
upper classes even worked to irradiate the Judas burnings altogether. The substantial changes
concerning the Judas burnings are indicative of major social changes.
The Porfirian upper classes were first alienated from, and than even began to look down
upon their traditional culture, as represented by the Judas burnings. As in England the
substantial changes in the social order which took place over this period are based in capitalism
3
Levi Fox
Page 4
2/16/2016
4
and in the social views which accompanied it. In this case, capitalism went hand in hand with
attempts at modernization and europeanization on the part of the upper classes. “Mexico’s
traditional culture… prevailed from the conquest until the 1870’s… This tradition was
shouldered aside by the emergent culture of capitalism and material development that promoters
called Progress… These Porfirians… rejected long established customs” (such as the Judas day
burnings) “ as backward, even primitive habits slowing inevitable progress” (Beezley p. 107).
This changing social view, which accompanied the rise of capitalism, was the basis for upper
classes desire to change the nature of the prevailing social system. The reaction of the lower
classes to the destruction of their social system is somewhat unclear. However, Beezley, in his
afterword, seems to draw some connection between the changes in Mexican society which took
place during the Porfirian era with the revolution of 1910, considered by many the first “popular”
revolution demanding major societal changes. Whether there exists such a connection is unclear,
however, it should be noted that so long as the pre-Porfiran social system had predominated no
society changing revolutions were sought by the lower classes.
Colombia in 1930 and before was characterized by “an enduring public tradition with
precapitalist and Catholic roots, conceived of as the embodiment of abstract reason, morality,
and the collective good” (Braun p 7). The political system was based upon the existence of two
parties which had differing views on society and government. In Colombia the emergence of
capitalism during this time set forth a chain of events which would ultimately destroy this sociopolitical system, culminating in la violencia, a civil war worse than any previous social
disturbance in Colombian history. The rise of capitalism and “Colombia’s integration into the
world economy brought the consensus between Liberals and Conservatives that made the politics
4
Levi Fox
Page 5
2/16/2016
5
of civility possible” (Braun p 29). In addition, it was the further “economic changes which took
place during convivencia [which] undermined the moral basis of public life” (Braun p. 34).
It was these economic changes, and the corrupt politics that went with them, which
enabled Gaitan to come to the political fore. It was only after the upper classes had altered the
social system, by engaging in convivencia politics, that his message would have been receptive
to the lower classes. Gaitan’s role is two fold in that he acted to heighten the political
consciousness of the lowest classes, and in that it was his assassination that created the situation
whereby “the crowd and the politicians shattered the relationships between leaders and followers
in Colombia” (Braun p 7). It was this further breakdown in relationships following Gaitain’s
death that directly led to la violencia. Yet again, the social system was drastically altered during
this period, with this alteration having as its primary cause the rise of capitalism. And yet again,
it was only after the upper classes had altered their role in the social system, in this case by
pushing modernization and forming a sort of political consensus, that the social system changed.
In all three societies, eighteenth century England, Porfirian Mexico, and early twentieth
century Colombia, two patterns ring true. First, it was the emergence of capitalism, and the
changing ideas that it brought with it, which served as the basis for changes in the prevailing
social system. And second, it was only after the upper, ruling class, the group most immediately
affected by the rise of capitalism, had determined to change the nature of their social system, that
such changes took place. In all these societies, the lower classes sought to adhere to the existing
social system. It was only after the upper classes had enacted a change, that the lower classes
responded by changing their role as well. Thus, in all three instances, changes in the social
system were enacted first by a response on the part of the upper classes to the emergence of
capitalism, and then by the responses of the lower classes to these upper class responses.
5