Knowledge is power : $b A view of the productive forces of modern society and the results of labor, capital and skill.Knight, Charles
Philosophy
Knowledge is power : $b A view of the productive forces of modern society and the results of labor, capital and skill.
Knight, Charles
Industrial arts; Industries
number of moose, and set my wife to make the skins into such
garments as were best adapted to the winter season, and which I
now saw we should be compelled to substitute for the blankets and
woollen clothes we had been accustomed to receive from the
traders."
This incident at once shows us that the great blessing of the civilized
state is its increase of the powers of production. Here we see the
Indians, surrounded on all sides by wild animals whose skins might be
made into garments, reduced to the extremity of distress because the
traders refused to advance them blankets and other necessaries, to be
used during the months when they were employed in catching the animals
from which they might obtain the skins. It is easy to see that the
Indians were a long way removed from the power of making blankets
themselves. Before they could reach this point, their forests must have
been converted into pasture-grounds;--they must have raised flocks of
sheep, and learnt all the various complicated arts, and possessed all
the ingenious machinery, for converting wool into cloth. By their
exchange of furs for blankets, they obtained a share in the
productiveness of civilization;--they obtained comfortable clothing with
much less labour than they could have made it out of the furs. If Tanner
had not considered the capote which he desired to obtain from the
traders, better, and less costly, than the garment of moose-skins, he
would not have carried on any exchange of the two articles with the
traders. The skins of martens and foxes were only valuable to the
Indians, without exchange, for the purpose of sewing together to make
covering. They had a different value in Europe as articles of luxury;
and therefore the Indians by exchange obtained a greater plenty of
superior clothing than if they had used the skins themselves. But the
very nature of the trade, depending upon chance supplies, rendered it
impossible that they should accumulate. They had such pressing need of
ammunition, traps, and blankets, that the produce of the labour of one
hunting season was not more than sufficient to procure the commodities
which they required to consume in the same season. But supposing the
Indians could have bred foxes and martens and beavers, as we breed
rabbits, for the supply of the European demand for fur, doubtless they
would have then advanced many steps in the character of producers. The
thing is perhaps impossible; but were it possible, and were the Indians
to have practised it, they would immediately have become capitalists, to
an extent that would have soon rendered them independent of the credit
of the traders. They must, however, have previously established a more
perfect appropriation. Each must have enclosed his own hunting-ground;
and each must have raised some food for the maintenance of his own stock
of beavers, foxes, and martens. It would be easier, doubtless, to raise
the food for themselves, and ultimately to exchange corn for clothing,
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account