Leather Mule
Political Economy Research Paper Part 2 (of 2 parts) by Thessayist Network
Initially, the farmers protested against the specification of crop to be planted, especially agitating against the production of cotton on such a wide scale. However, as Cuno points out, Mohammed Ali overcame resistance, especially to cotton production, through the following strategy: “Mohammed Ali was clever enough to encourage cotton farming initially by setting favourable prices at which the crop was bought by his state monopoly. But subsequently prices were lowered so as to increase considerably the profit margin for the state in the sale of cotton abroad.” As a matter of fact, so insistent was Mohammed Ali on the commercialization of cotton production and the expansion of cotton trade that the state launched irrigation and public works projects, not to mention launching industries (to be discussed in the next section), that supported and, were dependant upon cotton.
In addition to the above, Mohammed Ali introduced such policies as would revolutionize the means by which agricultural products were marketed. In brief, Mohammed Ali eliminated all mediators, such as merchants and local rural buyers, forcing peasants to sell their produce only to him. That is, he established a state monopoly over trade in agricultural produce, establishing a system wherein “the state assumed a dominant and almost exclusive role in moving agricultural products up and out of the countryside.”
As one may assume, although Mohammed Ali purchased all agricultural produce, except for the quantity that found its way into the black market, he did not market them himself. Instead, he used foreign merchants and traders for this purpose. In other words, he focused on Greek, Levantine and European merchants living in Egypt, to execute the marketing and export of crops. This was a logical decision considering that these foreign minority groups did have outside contacts, in addition to the fact that they had long been involved in the import and export trade and, therefore, had the requisite experience.
Considering the above agrarian policies, one can definitely state that they did have the positive effects of expanding the agricultural sector, establishing industries that was simultaneously supported by and, serviced this sector, and of placing Egypt on the world market as a significant exporter of fine-quality cotton. However, the cumulative effects of these policies on the native population, especially the farmers and the local rural merchants was detrimental. As regards the former, their means of livelihood was basically cut off, forcing them to turn to black market trade. As regards the later, the extent to which they were negatively influenced by these policies is summarized as follows: “The transition from subsistence farming to cash-cropping was quite painful for the Egyptian fellah. Once producing most of his needs within a closed system he was now thrown into an uncertain market. Because of market fluctuations, he was never sure how much his yearly labour would now buy him. The average annual fluctuation of cotton prices was close to 20 percent, and as the margin of price changes increased, so did his insecurity.” As Roderick argues, the situation of the Egyptian peasant was miserable due to Mohammed Ali’s agrarian economic policies. This view is confirmed by Barbara Larson who states that by the 1830s the Egyptian rural areas were suffering from food shortages due to the state’s specification of crops to be planted, with the greater interest given to cotton rather than food crops, in addition to which rural poverty had reached an all time high by 1837, with peasants completely unable to pay their taxes. As a means of escaping from payment, or from the punishment that comes with the failure to pay taxes, many peasant actually left the rural areas, resulting in a shortage of rural labour. Although the government tried to solve the problem by removing its monopoly over food crops and giving peasants the right to trade in them as they pleased, the situation was to drastic to be solved so easily.
While the agrarian economic policies introduced and implemented by Mohammed Ali did modernize agricultural production in Egypt, expand agricultural areas, and place Egypt on the map as one of the world’s most prominent cotton producers, the fact is that the extreme authoritarian control that the state held over the sector negatively influenced the country’s rural population. In brief, their standard of living suffered, reaching the point where they could barely support themselves or their families. Moreover, specification of crops to be planted led to a shortage pf essential food crops, culminating in the growth of hunger and food shortages. Consequently, while one can state that the status of agriculture improved, the price was paid by the agricultural workers themselves.
INDUSTRIAL POLICIES
Just as he was intent to upgrade and modernize the status of Egyptian agriculture, Mohammed Ali had similar intentions vis-Ã -vis the industrial sector. Initially, the industries he built were basically geared towards the production of military equipment, designed to service the needs of his expanding military, and the cotton sector. According to available facts and figures, it is apparent that Mohammed Ali was intent on building the nation’s textile industry. As Cuno writes, “49 percent of the cards, 22 per4cent of the mule jennies, and 57 percent of Egypt’s looms were set up in 1817-1821. Five of the nine bleaching works and only two of the printing works were also established before 1821 â