Is Capitalism Genetic?

Publish date:

Economist Greg Clark more or less argues that there is a genetic basis for capitalism, the industrial revolution and that this basis more or less explains why the industrial revolution took off in England rather than, say, in France, Italy or Germany. Of course "capitalism" itself probably isn't genetic but many of the traits that make for successful capitalists probably are heritable.
Here's the abstract to Clark's paper:

Before 1800 all societies, including England, were Malthusian.
The average man or woman had 2 surviving children. Such
societies were also Darwinian. Some reproductively successful
groups produced more than 2 surviving children, increasing their
share of the population, while other groups produced less, so that
their share declined. But unusually in England, this selection for
men was based on economic success from at least 1250, not
success in violence as in some other pre-industrial societies. The
richest male testators left twice as many children as the poorest.
Consequently the modern population of the English is largely
descended from the economic upper classes of the middle ages.
At the same time, from 1150 to 1800 in England there are clear
signs of changes in average economic preferences towards more
“capitalist” attitudes. The highly capitalistic nature of English
society by 1800 – individualism, low time preference rates, long
work hours, high levels of human capital – may thus stem from
the nature of the Darwinian struggle in a very stable agrarian
society in the long run up to the Industrial Revolution. The
triumph of capitalism in the modern world thus may lie as much
in our genes as in ideology or rationality.

You can read the entire paper here [pdf].
More discussion here from the lads at Gene Expression, here from Marginal Revolution and here from Steve Sailer.