How could you have a situation where free-market capitalism (Adam Smith style) is never accepted, and instead mercantallism, bullionism, and protectionism remain the major economic theories for at least another hundred years?
Find a way for trade from the Far East to still be Mediterranean-centric instead of Indian Ocean centric. OTL it was the switch in trade routes that broke the back of the great trading nations and guilds of Europe (and led to the gradual disintegration of the Ottoman Empire, as its main source of wealth - a monopoly on the Arabian trade routes central to Mediterranean trade - dried up).
Oh, well then, ISOT 17th-century muskets and and metalworking technology to all the less-advanced peoples of the world. It's not possible to skip the early imperialist/beginnings of Capitalism phase without something that forces a major change in attitude.I don't mean guilds, I mean the theories right after them, from the 1600s and 1700s. High tariffs, colonies can only trade with mother country, etc.
Oh, well then, ISOT 17th-century muskets and and metalworking technology to all the less-advanced peoples of the world. It's not possible to skip the early imperialist/beginnings of Capitalism phase without something that forces a major change in attitude.
Oops, I answered your question seriously the first time, then for whatever reason thought you were asking the opposite the second time. Disregard that. I'll have to think about this one.I don't think you're understanding what I'm saying. The earliest capitalism is what I want it to be stuck in for a while. I don't want late 1700s-1800s ideas about free trade and the like to develop. So that, come 1900, Europe still holds high tariffs and colonies are only allowed to trade with the colonizing power. Instead of OTL, where tariffs were relatively low and anyplace could trade anywhere else.
Adam Smith was one of the most brilliant mathematicians, philosophers, and statisticians of all of human history, and the unquestioned progenitor of modern economic theory. But he didn't invent economic liberalism.What about killing off Adam Smith? That should at least slow things down a bit.
Adam Smith was one of the most brilliant mathematicians, philosophers, and statisticians of all of human history, and the unquestioned progenitor of modern economic theory. But he didn't invent economic liberalism.
1. Find a way for the High Federalists (Hamilton's faction) to come out on top of the First Party System in the US. Hamilton's economic program for the US was pure mercantilism -- protective tariffs, a centralized banking system built on sovereign credit, and chartering national corporations as public-private partnerships granted special privileges. If we can somehow make this an uncontrovercial part of how business is done in the US, that's a major support to the survival of mercantilism.
2. Get rid of the Irish Potato Famine. It didn't escape notice that Britain's mercantilist Corn Laws lead to Ireland continuing to export large quantities of grain while the country was starving. This was a major contributing factor to free trade catching on in British political thought.
1. Find a way for the High Federalists (Hamilton's faction) to come out on top of the First Party System in the US. Hamilton's economic program for the US was pure mercantilism -- protective tariffs, a centralized banking system built on sovereign credit, and chartering national corporations as public-private partnerships granted special privileges. If we can somehow make this an uncontrovercial part of how business is done in the US, that's a major support to the survival of mercantilism.
2. Get rid of the Irish Potato Famine. It didn't escape notice that Britain's mercantilist Corn Laws lead to Ireland continuing to export large quantities of grain while the country was starving. This was a major contributing factor to free trade catching on in British political thought.
I'd almost think you'd have to go further back. The Dutch economy was already well on the way to breaking down a lot of that stuff on it's own, whether the burghers wanted it to or not. By the late-1700s, it was pretty much destined to continue on it's course. They'd already founded the *Verenigde Oostindische Compagnie (United East India Company, or the VOC) around 1600.
That was basically the world's first corporation, and when it was able to singlehandedly destroy the Portuguese colonial system's weak hold on the pepper trade by underselling them, all the rest of the countries followed suit. That was where the much more famous East India Company & Hudson's Bay Company came from.
So in my mind, the root of all this is with the Netherlands.
But what POD could do that? Federalists gradually lost power when it became apparent they were not in it for the "common man". They were almost aristocrats, which didn't go down very well.