How does that fit in with the fact that peasants and artisans moved into factories voluntarily? How does that fit with the fact that the Industrial Revolution was the start of a dizzying growth in production and the economy in general? Isn't it contradictory? Is there any historian with a different version than Marx?
Landless people had to seek their fortune in industry; industial capital did a lot to improve living condtions. With understanding the ethical position of Mr. Marx, I do think that Mr.Engels was much more exposed to the ‘real working class‘. The ‘Messiah‘ of the working class got its capitalist consumer paradise, after the events of 1989/90. Let capital and labor cooperate to create a win/win model of the modern economy, rethinking meta-capitalist evolution.
https://fee.org/articles/facts-about-the-industrial-revolution/
Thanks, Stephen. I would like to find historians that have written about that.
There are quite a few today, more than a few years ago, in Rondo Cameron's World Economic History there is a hint, Hayek coordinated a collective work called The History and the Historians. In them you can get the opposite version, the belief that that time was terrible for the workers is, questionable. One only has to ask, why did civilization survive and evolve so much with the Industrial Revolution? Bernstein himself in Germany is the best example that Marx, is not saying the truth, in fact he had no direct contact with the working masses, he had a distorted view, which was not contradicted by Engels who did know these, in his own factory.
Thanks, Daniel. That's why I'm searching for historians that have published an opposite view than Marx's.