I'm looking for some Austrian views about the "Second Industrial Revolution", specifically reasons of why Britain was caught up by Germany and USA. The thesis of Prof. Joel Mokyr (anti-libertarian) states that (and this is not Mokyr himself, but another economist explaining his thesis in a local newspaper) because of the higher technicals skills that were required in the second phase of the Industrial Revolution "Great Britain suffered a progressive backward path in comparison with other countries, such as Germany and USA, because of the weakness of its technical education. The education in Great Britain was essentially private and oriented towards human sciences, and the State didn't take any measures to develope the technical knowledge that was needed for the new phase in this capitalistic development."
On the other hand, he affirms that USA and Germany (Prussia) stimulated (with government intervention) technical education and that was the reason why they caught up with Britain."
I thought about four refutations:
1. "correlation does not imply causation" [this might be a valid refutation, but I want to confirm any other of the following:
2. USA and Germany caught up Britain because Britain was developed before and marginal development for less-developed USA and Germany was higher.
3. Great Britain didn't have "laissez-faire education" during the Second Industrial Revolution and due to government intervention, britains couldn't get technical education.
4. USA and German educational systems were lassez-faire (completely discarded)
I checked this article by Ellen Frankel Paul, but the only thing I could find is that in 1839 it was created a Committee of Education (and is the only mention about that topic). Every other source I checked gives 1870 as the date that Compulsory education, and government-controlled education started.
I need if someone can point an article that explains any of things, about the Second Revolution itself, or the educational system of Great Britain, USA and Germany, confirming any of my points. Or, if you have a better idea to refutate Prof. Mokyr, just let me know.
P.S. Also, Art Carden was interviewed last year by Free Market Radio, and he mentions this guy Mokyr. I haven't listened yet the interview, but I'm almost sure that he doesn't address this problem.
Thanks!
I missed to clarify that I'm not looking for exhaustive bibligoraphy but just a pair of paragraphs, I'm not making my point about this topic, but how intellectuals are the allies of the State by manipulating history, and this is just an example.
Could be hard to answer, as many historical questions. A recent article argued, that the absence of effective copyright laws in Germany caused a rapid increase in the number of published books - and this seems to point into your direction (don't know how the US fared in this area, although the free market leanings could explain much there). Let us know if you find out more!
The "Literature Newspaper" reported in 1826 that "the majority of works concern natural objects of all types and especially the practical application of nature studies in medicine, industry, agriculture, etc." Scholars in Germany churned out tracts and handbooks on topics such as chemistry, mechanics, engineering, optics and the production of steel. In England during the same period, an elite circle indulged in a classical educational canon centered more on literature, philosophy, theology, languages and historiography. Practical instruction manuals of the type being mass-produced in Germany, on topics from constructing dikes to planting grain, were for the most part lacking in England.
The "Literature Newspaper" reported in 1826 that "the majority of works concern natural objects of all types and especially the practical application of nature studies in medicine, industry, agriculture, etc." Scholars in Germany churned out tracts and handbooks on topics such as chemistry, mechanics, engineering, optics and the production of steel.
Mises Wiki | Economic Resources and Books (search engine)
Thanks for the info Peter.
I couldn't find anymore information about that, but I no longer needed.
Anyway I found some quite interesting bibliography that Rothbard cites in The Ethics of Liberty, so if someone is interested in that topic should read:
F.A. Hayek (ed.), Capitalism and Historians
R.M. Hartwell, The Industrial Revolution and Economic Growth
Ashton or Hutt are also recommended.