If Frederick Douglass If There's No Struggle, There Is No Progress?
’’ If there is no struggle, there is no progress.’’ - This rather condensed yet very truthful quote by the former slave, Frederick Douglass, quite completely epitomizes both the unbending devotion of the entrepreneurs and hardship of the working-class that undeniably defined the entire era of the Industrial Revolution. Assuredly, such struggle did give rise to immense progress, which brought about extensive advancements to the existing technologies, social sciences and standards of living as well as fuelled the concepts of social theory and industrialism. Along with a tremendous development and implementation of the intellectual paradigms (being Marxism and capitalism/libertarianism primarily), most aspects of human life, whether concerning
…show more content…
During the mid 〖19〗^th century, children under the age of 15 comprised more than 20% of the workforce in Britain’s textile industry, and rights insuring proper child benefits were unseen until the early 〖20〗^th century. Furthermore, due to the intensifying urbanization, labourers often resided in vastly overpopulated residential areas in which disease and despicable living conditions were part of a truly dubious existence .
My analysis will primarily cover the era’s societal tendencies, and how these precipitated a prodigious and ever-increscent socioeconomic chasm between the established social classes. In this attempt, I covet to address the repercussions and importance of the prospering Laissez-faire mentality that accomplished both tremendous advancement and great calamity for those born into …show more content…
As the innovating manufacturers were quick to attain wealth, they constituted a more crucial part of a country’s economy and overall comfort than the rather apathetic gentry, whose dry lands soon became of little importance.
Consequently, this peculiar relationship between the upper classes caused the aristocracy to friend themselves with the working class, as though they would retain their power with the numerous labourers’ support. Soon, both factory owners and nobles fought for the popularity of the common folk, which eventually led to the approval of the first Factory Acts and thus laid the cornerstones for future labour unions and workers’ rights - without the need for any Marxist-inspired blood-stained
During the mid 〖19〗^th century, children under the age of 15 comprised more than 20% of the workforce in Britain’s textile industry, and rights insuring proper child benefits were unseen until the early 〖20〗^th century. Furthermore, due to the intensifying urbanization, labourers often resided in vastly overpopulated residential areas in which disease and despicable living conditions were part of a truly dubious existence .
My analysis will primarily cover the era’s societal tendencies, and how these precipitated a prodigious and ever-increscent socioeconomic chasm between the established social classes. In this attempt, I covet to address the repercussions and importance of the prospering Laissez-faire mentality that accomplished both tremendous advancement and great calamity for those born into …show more content…
As the innovating manufacturers were quick to attain wealth, they constituted a more crucial part of a country’s economy and overall comfort than the rather apathetic gentry, whose dry lands soon became of little importance.
Consequently, this peculiar relationship between the upper classes caused the aristocracy to friend themselves with the working class, as though they would retain their power with the numerous labourers’ support. Soon, both factory owners and nobles fought for the popularity of the common folk, which eventually led to the approval of the first Factory Acts and thus laid the cornerstones for future labour unions and workers’ rights - without the need for any Marxist-inspired blood-stained