Chapter 144: Daying's Vigilance (Two in One)

In recent months, there have been a lot of changes in the imperial positions.

The original Grand Vizier of the Empire, Yusuf Pasha, has resigned. After Haji Pasha resigned from the position of Governor of Egypt, he immediately went to Constantiniere and became the new Grand Vizier of the Empire.

Ishak Pasha went to Egypt to take over the position of Governor. As for Kuchuk Pasha, he was sent to Mesopotamia by Severin the Great to prepare for the Great Expedition.

However, before the Great Expedition began, Severin the Great had already practiced Tai Chi.

In fact, Severin the Great was not a person who liked to practice Tai Chi, but the British Empire had already put its face in the face of the Ottoman government.

Recently, Dai Ying had sent a note to the Ottoman ambassador in London.

In this note, Dai Ying made several requests to the Ottoman Empire.

According to the report sent back by the London ambassador, Dai Ying had three requests.

This is also the main content of Izzet-Mohammed's report to Severin the Great today.

"Your Majesty, first of all, it's about Egyptian cotton.

The British hope that we can export Egyptian cotton to them. Considering our needs, the British are willing to buy it at a premium of double the price of Indian cotton.

At the same time, Britain expressed its willingness to stand on our side on the issue of the protection of the Orthodox Christians in the empire and jointly criticize Tsarist Russia."

After hearing this request, Emperor Serbia almost couldn't hold it.

Is William Pitt's brain broken? You know, after losing the North American colonies, Britain is in a serious shortage of cotton or raw materials for the textile industry. This is not something that Britain can provide. The wool and cotton of the British Empire combined are not enough for the development of the British textile industry.

As for the so-called enclosure movement, it was just a climax of enclosure in the countryside set off by the British in the last thirty years of the fifteenth century and the first few decades of the sixteenth century.

At that time, it was mainly due to the rapid development of the wool textile industry in Flanders and later Britain, which greatly increased the demand for wool and caused the continuous rise in wool prices.

Influenced by this, the income of sheep farming was twice that of agriculture at that time, so the new nobles turned arable land into sheep farms. They used violence, withdrawal of tenancy and other methods to drive farmers off the land, and enclosed large tracts of land with fences, ditches or hedges to make pastures, or operated them themselves, or rented them out to large ranchers. This is the so-called enclosure movement.

It first started in the southern rural areas that were closely connected with the market. The landlords initially started by enclosing public land such as forests, pastures, wastelands, and swamps, and then expanded to the rented land of small farmers.

By the 1530s, the religious reform in England and the subsequent confiscation and auction of church property pushed the enclosure movement to a climax and accelerated the process of depriving farmers of their land.

In the second half of the 16th century, due to the development of industry and commerce, the non-agricultural population continued to increase, and the demand for agricultural and sideline products such as grain and meat in towns and industrial and mining enterprises increased greatly, which stimulated the development of large farms. In order to concentrate their operations, those farmers drove farmers off the land and enclosed large tracts of land as capitalist farms to engage in capitalist operations.

The enclosure movement was essentially a change in production relations. Since a large number of peasants were forcibly deprived of their means of production and living materials, they were put into the labor market and transformed into hired workers, thus creating a future for the development of capitalist production.

At the same time, the enclosure movement forcibly eliminated the system of peasants occupying land and began to transform feudal land ownership into capitalist land ownership.

The nobles rented most of the enclosed land to agricultural capitalists and collected capitalist rent. At the end of the 16th century, a capitalist farmer class specializing in renting landlords' land appeared in Britain. At the same time, the small and medium nobles also became bourgeois and became new nobles. Later, wealthy peasants, urban tycoons, and officials of all sizes also became new nobles.

The new nobles deprived peasants of their land and implemented capitalist management, thus gaining the support of the emerging bourgeoisie, and they formed an alliance. It is undeniable that he did support the development of Britain's early textile industry.

However, this could only support the development of Britain's early textile industry. When Hargreaves invented the Jenny spinning machine in 1765, Britain could no longer provide enough raw materials to support its textile industry.

But at this time, Daiying still had North America, so he was not in a hurry. However, Luoying Shenfu led the people to do something for Daiying. Guess what, the Thirteen States, eh, are gone.

The cotton supply during this period was in a state of shortage for Daiying. After all, India had not been completely taken over, so how could it be possible to supply the country with large-scale Indian cotton?

As for the conditions offered by Daiying, Emperor Serbia was too lazy to pay attention to this stupid condition.

He still stood on the side of Emperor Serbia on the issue of the protection of the Orthodox Christians in the Ottoman Empire. This was originally an internal affairs issue. It was your turn for Daiying not to support this side.

Daiying is awesome, isn't my good brother France awesome? Wouldn't France support it? What the hell, this can also be used to make conditions, Daiying is really a fool.

If William Pitt said that he was willing to send troops to help during the Russo-Turkish War, the navy would enter the Black Sea and the Baltic Sea for the Ottoman Empire to block the Russians, or directly kill the Russian fleet. The lobster soldiers were directly put on the battlefield to attack the Russian army. There was nothing else to do. The Great Serbian Emperor did not say anything and just followed along. The export of Egyptian cotton was not a problem.

You are willing to stand on the side of the Great Serbian Emperor on the issue of the protection of the Orthodox Christians in the Ottoman Empire. Are you feeding a grown man a lollipop?

This is not the Ottoman Empire in the mid-nineteenth century, nor is it the India you led by the British. You dare to interfere in internal affairs. Do you really think this is a semi-colony?

The Sultan did not speak, but motioned Izzet-Mohammed to continue.

He wanted to know whether the British really thought that they did not understand or whether this was a test by the British.

It has been a while since the last meeting, and it is difficult to guarantee whether the British have learned some news and come to test the empire on purpose.

This is also what the Emperor Sai is most worried about. An overly powerful Ottoman Empire and a weak Persia make it difficult for the British not to worry that the Ottoman Empire will threaten India.

"Your Majesty, the next is the second request of the British. They are willing to provide the empire with process manufacturing technologies such as steam engines and textile machines, and are willing to send experienced workers and engineers to guide the work. They hope to use this in exchange for the empire to reduce tariffs."

"Tariffs?" The Emperor Sai remembered that he had ordered the other party to adjust the tariff rate of the Ottoman Empire.

The Sultan asked immediately.

"What is the current tariff rate?"

Izzet-Mohammed immediately picked up another document and answered.

"Your Majesty, based on your ideas and theories, I have made major adjustments to the Empire's tariff system.

Considering the rich variety of imports from the Empire, I will not list the tax rates of each imported commodity one by one.

Regarding the issue of import tariffs, I have adjusted the average tax rate to about 40%.

At the same time, I have removed a lot of goods that were originally on the duty-free list.

This is just preliminary. The early industrial development of the Empire hardly requires imported raw materials, so I will further adjust the policy in the later stage to encourage the development of state-owned enterprises and private enterprises."

Emperor Sergei nodded, and he remembered that he also used List's theory to adopt trade protection.

But in the end, the Americans succeeded in rising, and Latin America, where is Latin America, this is my America's backyard.

You ask who said this, Monroe said it, if you don't agree, come and do it.

This is actually a very interesting phenomenon, why did the United States succeed and Latin America fail?

Or why did the high tariffs in Latin America not bring about industrial development, but the high tariffs in the United States did.

The Great Ser has read several viewpoints, among which the two most interesting ones are:

One viewpoint believes that the high tariffs in Latin America protect low-value handicraft workshops, causing long-term stagnation of industrial development. The explanation for the high tariffs in the United States is that although the nominal tariffs in the United States are high, the tariff exemption rate is much higher than that in Latin America, resulting in low actual tariff protection.

Another viewpoint mentions that the exemptions of US tariffs lead to differentiation, which is the driving force of its development.

These two ideas seem to be consistent, but they are contradictory on specific issues. For example, since it is believed that high tariffs protect backward hand-made textile workshops, should high tariffs be adopted in the development of modern textile industry?

This touches the core of the problem. Yes or no cannot answer economic questions.

In the view of the Great Ser, this problem can only be explained from a broader framework.

The history of tariffs in the United States is actually very clearly divided.

One is the 1790 period, followed by a period of high tariffs, which lasted until around 1830. By 1840, tariffs had fallen to a very low level.

Around 1865, high tariffs were restarted, and after 1910, tariffs began to decline again.

Another is that 1750 is the boundary. Before the colonial period, the US tariff rate was very low.

So, what was the economic level of the United States before 1750, 1790, and 1865?

In fact, as early as 1775, when the United States just became independent, it was already a top developed country, second only to Britain.

Even earlier, as early as the end of the colonial period, that is, after 1720, the United States had already stood out from the economic development curve of various countries, following Britain to become the first echelon. At this time, France, Germany and Latin America were intertwined to become the second echelon.

After 1800, France and Germany left Latin America behind and became a separate second echelon, and Latin America became the third echelon. (For ease of explanation, the United States and Germany are used directly)

The "tariff protection of infant industries" claimed by Americans in 1790 was actually not infantile at all, because the per capita output of the United States before tariff protection was probably the second in the world.

In other words, the US tariff protection is carried out under the premise of "having formed a huge relative advantage", while the high tariffs in Latin America were carried out after 1830 under relatively backward conditions, so it is normal that the results are completely different.

The United States did not have a very high tariff level during its rapid colonial period, while Latin America adopted high tariffs in a backward state and did not bring about great industrial development.

From an empirical point of view, high tariffs are not a panacea under the condition of a relatively weak position.

Logically speaking, the most important part of the development of late-developing markets is the introduction of foreign capital.

Whether it is the introduction of Soviet foreign capital by a certain Eastern power in 1950 or the introduction of US and Japanese foreign capital in 1980, the logic is that foreign capital is introduced to bring leading technology promotion and advanced management experience.

More importantly, in the absence of capital accumulation, the investment in advanced equipment is exchanged through the open market.

Therefore, high tariffs and the introduction of foreign capital are often contradictory, because the introduction of foreign capital means the tilt of the entire industrial chain, not just the money coming and going. It is beyond doubt that high tariffs will establish higher cross-border commercial barriers.

Of course, even in this case, Latin America still introduced a lot, mainly including British and German foreign capital.

However, the market barriers are too high, which may lead to foreign capital only entering the resource industry with monopoly and huge profits to obtain a comfortable profit margin.

The reason why the United States dared to impose high tariffs in 1790 was that they were almost the most efficient economy. The so-called "infant industry theory" was successful in the relatively mature United States, but failed in the "truly immature" Latin America.

List's theory worked in the flour industry in Argentina, but it did not succeed in other places.

The question is, is the Ottoman Empire suitable? It must be suitable, because this is not a high tariff dominated by a single free market economy, but a high tariff model with state intervention.

In the implementation of this policy, what is the Ottoman Empire also superior to Latin America?

It was the Ottoman Empire's superior output capacity compared to Latin America, the Ottoman Empire's larger size than any single Latin American country, and the rural purchasing power liberated by Serbia after completing certain land reforms.

The most important of these was the benefits brought by land reform.

It should be understood that the so-called low rural purchasing power and the absence of rural purchasing power are two completely different things.

What the great powers of later generations based their use of colonies as places for dumping goods on was the low purchasing power of the rural areas, not the non-existent purchasing power.

On this basis, the mother country broke through the tariff barriers of the colonies by signing an unequal "Trade Agreement" with the colonies, and the colonies were forced to pursue a free market policy.

The great powers first completed the original wealth plunder by dumping opium, and then occupied the colonial market with cheap daily necessities produced by industrialization. The advantages of industrialized centralized production were not comparable to those of small workshops and guilds in the colonies.

It was difficult for the colonial government to implement industrialization reforms and compete with the great powers, and the general poverty of the colonial people further exacerbated their lack of purchasing power and their ability to buy cheap industrial products.

This method is very familiar to the Emperor of Serbia. The situation in the late Qing Dynasty was caused by this method.

But if you look at the world, you will find that it is not just the Qing Dynasty. The great powers use this method against everyone, including the Ottoman Empire where the Emperor of Serbia is located. It will also go down this path in the future, but the method and degree will be different.

The Sultan shook his head and yawned.

"Do the British have a third request or condition?"