How Did Capitalism Emerge? Expropriation, Colonial Expansion and Racialization

The emergence of capitalism is often presented as the result of the saving, hard work and entrepreneurial spirit of a few individuals. This representation, reminiscent of the fable of the ant and the grasshopper, is strongly challenged by the Marxian critique of political economy. For Karl Marx, the historical starting point was not the patient accumulation of wealth: it was first and foremost expropriation.

From this perspective, the formation of capitalism cannot be understood without examining the separation of producers from their means of production, European commercial and colonial expansion, the development of slavery in the Americas, and the forms of hierarchy and racialization that accompanied these transformations.

Expropriation, the Starting Point of Capitalist Accumulation

Capitalism rests on a particular social relationship: on one side are people who own the means of production; on the other are people who, having been separated from them, must sell their labor power in order to live. It is this separation that makes modern wage labor possible.

Marx used the expression “primitive accumulation” to refer to the phase that precedes and makes capitalist accumulation proper possible. But the term can be misleading. The initial element is not accumulation itself, but the act through which peasants, artisans and other producers lose access to their land, tools or resources.

The enclosures—that is, the fencing off and appropriation of land that had previously been accessible under collective usage rights—are among the best-known examples of this process. They helped create a population deprived of autonomous means of subsistence. This population then became available for wage labor, while land and resources became property that could be exploited according to a logic of profit.

This interpretation therefore emphasizes the role of coercion, dispossession and institutional violence. The history of capitalism did not begin with free exchange between individuals who were already on equal footing, but with the historical creation of this unequal position.

From Feudalism to Capitalism: A European Transformation

According to Alain Bihr, the capitalist relation of production began to take shape within European feudalism. It did not arise from a single event or an instantaneous shift. It was built through long-term transformations: the development of mercantile capital, the gradual decline of the old social orders, the formation of more integrated markets, the consolidation of state apparatuses and the multiplication of rivalries between European powers.

This transition also transformed the organization of society. The estates characteristic of the feudal world were gradually reconfigured into class relations. Mercantilist policies, taxation, public credit and war all contributed to this dynamic, bringing commercial interests, state power and financial accumulation closer together.

However, it is important to distinguish between two questions. Understanding how a mode of production functions is not the same as explaining how it came into being. Marx mainly analyzed the mechanisms of already established capitalism: the production of surplus value, accumulation and the reproduction of capital. His observations on its historical origins nevertheless open up a vast field of inquiry into the concrete conditions of its formation.

Colonial Expansion and the Role of Trade

European expansion into the Americas, Africa and certain regions of Asia was a major element in this history. It expanded commercial spaces, intensified competition between centers of accumulation and provided European powers with outlets, raw materials and financial resources.

This expansion should not be reduced to simple trade between territories. It involved conquest, colonial domination and profound social transformations, both in colonized regions and in Europe. Commercial profits, the development of plantations and the growth of credit networks were part of a broader movement in the formation of the first capitalist markets.

Slave trades occupied an essential place in this picture, while also requiring a precise approach. These trading networks involved diverse periods, spaces and actors; reducing them to a single formula prevents an understanding of their complexity. The article on the terms used to discuss slave trades notably recalls the need to distinguish between the different routes and historical configurations.

Colonial Slavery and the Rise of Plantations

Slavery was not invented by capitalism. It existed in antiquity and persisted in various forms throughout the Middle Ages, notably in areas on the periphery of feudal Europe, in domestic labor, mines, galleys and certain Mediterranean plantations.

But modern colonial slavery took on a specific scale and function with the plantation economy. Sugar cane, followed by other crops such as cotton, coffee and indigo, became associated with systems of forced labor organized on a large scale. In the English colonies of North America and in the Caribbean, wage labor and temporary indenture for poor Europeans also existed before slavery became widespread in several territories.

The system of indenture was based on a contract: migrants unable to pay for their crossing worked for several years for a person who financed their passage. This status was not the same as slavery. It nevertheless illustrates the diversity of forms of forced and dependent labor that coexisted during the transition to capitalism.

In this analysis, slavery in the colonies was the counterpart to the development of wage labor in the metropolises. The two realities were not identical, but they were part of the same world in formation, marked by the expansion of exchange, dispossession and the pursuit of profit.

Racism Does Not Explain Slavery: It Can Also Be Its Product

An important point is that contemporary racial categories should not automatically be projected onto all past slave societies. In antiquity, slavery did not necessarily rest on a theory of races. Prisoners of war, in particular, could be enslaved without their condition being justified by a biological hierarchy of human groups.

In colonial societies where slavery became durably concentrated on Black populations, racialized justifications developed and grew stronger. Racialization then made it possible to classify, assign and legitimize an already established domination. In other words, slavery can help produce racism, rather than simply being the result of pre-existing racism.

This approach does not imply that racism automatically disappears with the abolition of slavery. Ideas and institutions can persist beyond the social relations that gave rise to them, especially when they find new uses in relations of domination, exploitation or discrimination. Societies shaped by slavery and colonization may thus retain deeply structuring hierarchies and representations.

A Dispossession That Is Not Merely a Thing of the Past

Thinking about the emergence of capitalism through expropriation ultimately calls into question the idea that violence was limited to its origins. In this interpretation, capitalism continues to expand by incorporating new spaces, activities and populations into its logic. It can therefore reproduce forms of dispossession, including against groups already dependent on wage labor or marginalized.

This historical analysis does not remove the need to distinguish between the contexts and mechanisms specific to each era. It nevertheless provides a central point of reference: capitalism did not develop solely through the market and technological progress. It was also formed through power relations, appropriations and global expansion that profoundly reshaped societies.

FAQ on the Emergence of Capitalism

What is primitive accumulation according to Marx?

It refers to the historical conditions that made capitalist accumulation possible. The Marxian critique emphasizes that these conditions notably involved the expropriation of producers, who were separated from their land, tools and resources.

Was capitalism born solely from saving and trade?

No. Trade and saving played a role, but they are not enough to explain the emergence of the capitalist wage relation. Expropriation, the formation of markets, the state, colonial expansion and relations of forced labor were also part of the process.

Was slavery always racist?

No. Slavery existed in societies that did not conceive of humanity through racial categories in the modern sense. The concentration of colonial slavery on Black populations contributed to the development and consolidation of specific racist ideologies.