The Industrial Revolution resulted in many huge changes in society, including a growth in capitalism. The social and political effects have produced a great amount of debate. Andrew Ure, Karl Marx, and Adam Smith all had differing views on industrial capitalism and opinions about what its social consequences would be. Ure’s “The Philosophy of Manufactures,” Marx’s “The Communist Manifesto,” and Smith’s “Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations” all portray their perspectives. In Andrew Ure’s “The Philosophy of Manufactures,” he shows his support for the Industrial Revolution. Ure believed that all of the improvements in technology made workers’ lives easier. The new technology allows workers to produce more products in less amount of time, which would equal greater productivity, which would then equal more wealth for companies and for the country. Ure makes an argument that the people who work in factories have better lives than those who live and work on farms, because of the advanced technology that factory workers have access to. Ure also presents the argument that factory workers are not necessarily treated unfairly just because they do not receive breaks while at work. His argument is …show more content…
He believes that the wealth of the nation is increased by the increase of production, the increase of trade, improvement of technology, and expansion of the nation’s market. He believes that all of these things can be the result of division of labor between different classes. I think that Adam Smith would agree more with Ure because these ideas align with the support of industrial capitalism, which is what Ure believed in as well. Even though Smith and Ure may not agree with industrial capitalism for the same reasons, they were both still supporters of it, whereas Marx was not as much of a