The Market & Nature

The market and nature

Polanyi in the great transformation talks of the market and land and how the two came to intertwine. Man and nature are inseparable, man labours the land and is a form of stability for man, despite this Polanyi believes that the market destroys the traditional relationships between man and labour, and between man and land . The end to the feudal system meant that Britain privatised land for industrial purposes and cultivation, known as commercialisation of soil. Polanyi outlines how the labour laws were set up by lawyers, therefore were just, however the economy regulated land through land owners, and is therefore subject to the economy and free market. The privatisation of land created an unjust method of habituation for the rural and poorer classes and resulted in a rush for acts to keep them housed. Jeremy Bentham saw the mobilisation of land as a method of individual liberty, where as Polanyi recognised the domination and selfishness behind the system, trading/middle classes used the mobilisation of land as a means to depress the working class, their lack of education meant the few who could observe the fallacies of free market were few too many. This shows how the trading class stood for development rather than for the interest of the community, many anthropologists argue that it is in human nature to live in self interest and  is a precondition to survival, however Polanyi contradicts this demonstrating the social nature of man, his economy is submerged in his social relationships, taking importance in safeguarding aspects such as their social standing.

As land became scarce Britain began to colonise other countries in order to use their land for wealth, shattering many cultural systems, and affecting the poorest cultures. Growth meant that during the 18th century mobilisation of land went from national to international and created a global interdependence, as industrial agriculture spread to more agricultural countries, they were found to be affected the most because the colonisation of their land created a cycle of poverty, due to the fact they no longer own their land or produce. Polanyi saw the malice behind this, because international trade was often unchecked, in Europe the destruction  of rural land was becoming an issue, this meant that 'corn laws' were introduced in order to reduce the consequences of the free market, however the agricultural countries were still exploited, due to the disorganisation of many of their societies and a lack of political systems/status, there were no such policies to protect their land from the market. On top of this African men and women were taken from their land and also put on the free market.

An irony comes from post world war one, in which Polanyi explains how the 'peasants' or working class built back Europe and came to dominated the  market economy, as lower prices emerged to avoid misery. War had brought ruin to land and fear struck a panic that food and raw materials were scarce, so access to food was low. This was a transformation from the previous distaste the working class had for the free market, now seeing growth in a time of fear as having more importance than ecological consequences after a time of destruction. 

Lydia Fox