Zhu77's Blogs

I argue that in his framework, Adam Smith leaves out the exploitation of certain groups, including women, colonized regions, and people of color, which is fundamental to the origins and expansion of capitalism. Recognizing this omission is important to understanding inequality in modern capitalist structures and reimagining a more just economic system. 

Women have been sacrificed to initiate capital accumulation. Historically, they have faced multiple layers of oppression across different spheres. As Maria Mies argues in Patriarchy and Accumulation on a World Scale: Women in the International Division of Labour, women have been exploited “as human beings by man,” “as housewives by capital,” and “as wage-workers” if they are wage-wakers. Since capitalism depends on the endless process of capital accumulation, patriarchal structures and the exploitation of women remain integral to sustaining its function. Unfortunately, the mainstream framework of capitalism disregards women’s perspectives and fails to address these gendered injustices. While Smith’s division of labor increases productivity, unpaid domestic labor by women is never recognized as “productive.”

A similar dynamic exists between the developed regions that gain capitalist benefits and the underdeveloped regions that bear the costs. Again, according to Mies, because capital accumulation is a never-ending process, developed regions “overdevelop,” regardless of the resulting poverty and instability elsewhere. This dynamic sustains an exploitative world order that keeps capitalism functioning. For example, while wealthy Western countries prospered through colonialism, their colonies suffered devastating economic and social consequences.

During European colonization in the Americas, capital accumulation was directly tied to exploitation of people of color. In his NYT article “In order to understand the brutality of American capitalism, you have to start on the plantation,” Matthew Desmond emphasizes the “violence on non-white people” as an essential condition for fueling the U.S. cotton economy, noting that the value of enslaved workers “[exceeded] that of all the railroads and factories in the nation.” This economic prosperity on plantations, one of the most significant accumulations of capital, was primarily achieved through slavery, driven by the coercion, dehumanization, and exploitation of people of color. Yet, there are still limited discussions and efforts on restructuring the global market. Smith’s free market suggests voluntary exchange, while capitalist expansion was based on racial violence and forced labor.

While Smith highlights the upsides of societal transformations of 18th-century England and expresses concerns about poverty and inequality, he does not address the destructive implications of capitalism for vulnerable populations. When examining capitalism, however, it is crucial to include voices of these disadvantaged groups to ensure a comprehensive and unbiased understanding of history and so-called “human nature.” Only by amplifying minority voices can we move toward a just society.