In "The Relentless Revolution - A History of Capitalism", Joyce Appleby set out to demonstrate that the thing we call Capitalism today is not a necessity that had to happen, but rather a very specific economic paradigm, shaped by its location of origin (18th century England) and a range of historic coincidences. For Appleby, today’s Capitalism is not "inexorable, inevitable or destined" but a surprising detour from a relatively stable economic order that reigned for several millennia.
\nI like this premise, as it favors contingency over the more often used agency- and structure-focused approaches to history.
Reading the book I realized I really needed an updated in 18th and 19th century history (in particular in regards to the US). And in relation to Appleby's intention I realized that my understanding of "Capitalism" indeed was a very naturalized one.
\nSo going back to square one and asking "What is Capitalism?", this is what I took from Appleby as a universal and culture-neutral definition:
\nTo arrive at what we have today, there is a whole lot of contingent elements we have to add:
\nIf we zoom in on the words, this is how it could be distinguished:
\nNow Appleby also contrasts Capitalism™️ against other capitalisms. We may consider this as alternative contingency layers put on top of the capitalist core idea.
\nThroughout the book, Germany is frequently used as example for such an alternative flavour, with some essential differences:
\nThis characterisation of German flavoured capitalism fascinates me. Most of these traits are still active today and combined, these shape the way German economy works, showing both its specific strengths and weaknesses. At the one hand, German capitalism has lots of features that soften the worst edges of unregulated competition and capital accumulation. On the other hand, these specifics also create a dampening effect to the upsides of this economic system. The floor and the ceiling are less distant in the German version of capitalism.
\nIt strikes me that the German specifics of capitalism are much more present in German mainstream discourse than the universal features of vanilla capitalism. While I know about the advantages of all the buffering elements in the German economy, I now see the disadvantages of this specific perspective more clearly. I think the German understanding of Capitalism has largely formed around "taming", "prevention" and "protection" against an ambigous force that might sweep away everything. I think the intuitive position of the average German would probably considered strongly anti-capitalist by US-american standards. Which is really weird, because the average German is also super conservative and considers a left-wing mayor in Berlin a greater thread to society than having fascists rule an entire state in Eastern Germany.
\nTo me it seems that an intuitive understanding of the core traits of capitalism (leverage private investment into transforming the modes of production) is only present within a relatively small business- and capital-adjacent elite that is so smug that the last economy-liberal party (FDP) representing this group has now disappeared into oblivion after years of embarrassing themselves with hypocritical takes on meritocracy.
\nReading The Relentless Revolution has changed my understanding of German economy in an interesting way. I now have a greater appreciation for the kinds of grass-roots capitalist economic acumen that I often observed by folks from the UK and US.
\n","content_hash":"sha256:1d3c6195436e6223a747b52adf2357974715f874b79046252d7381547bddd9dd","media":[],"transclusions":[],"changelog":[{"version":1,"at":"2026-10-31T06:33:52Z","note":null},{"version":2,"at":"2026-10-31T08:57:14Z","note":"Added heading"}]}