What you are picking up on is the foundational problem in most sweeping historical narratives about capitalism. The word itself has been stretched to the point of uselessness. If everything from medieval markets to my buying a coffee yesterday is capitalism then the term no longer distinguishes anything of analytical value. Beckert is falling into the same trap many historians do by anthropomorphizing an economic framework into an independent historical actor. Once you grant “capitalism” agency you can make it the source of anything you like which conveniently immunizes the argument from real-world exceptions.
A better approach is to pin down what specific institutional and technological arrangements we are talking about. Property rights enforcement mass production capital markets globalized trade networks wage labor contracts. These are observable economic structures. They evolve over time. You can measure when and where they appear. That removes the magic force narrative and forces us to grapple with human decisions incentives and constraints which is how actual history works.
You are also right to question the conflation of capitalism with modernity. Much of what we enjoy today exists because of accumulated scientific knowledge engineering breakthroughs and energy exploitation rather than because of a particular ideology about markets. Capital allocation mechanisms matter but without the industrial and technological revolutions 19th century cotton traders would still be selling into a far smaller slower poorer world.
What you are picking up on is the foundational problem in most sweeping historical narratives about capitalism. The word itself has been stretched to the point of uselessness. If everything from medieval markets to my buying a coffee yesterday is capitalism then the term no longer distinguishes anything of analytical value. Beckert is falling into the same trap many historians do by anthropomorphizing an economic framework into an independent historical actor. Once you grant “capitalism” agency you can make it the source of anything you like which conveniently immunizes the argument from real-world exceptions.
A better approach is to pin down what specific institutional and technological arrangements we are talking about. Property rights enforcement mass production capital markets globalized trade networks wage labor contracts. These are observable economic structures. They evolve over time. You can measure when and where they appear. That removes the magic force narrative and forces us to grapple with human decisions incentives and constraints which is how actual history works.
You are also right to question the conflation of capitalism with modernity. Much of what we enjoy today exists because of accumulated scientific knowledge engineering breakthroughs and energy exploitation rather than because of a particular ideology about markets. Capital allocation mechanisms matter but without the industrial and technological revolutions 19th century cotton traders would still be selling into a far smaller slower poorer world.