THE IMPACTS OF INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION TO MODERN STATE SYSTEM

ABSTRACT

Industrial revolution is the transformation from old fashion means of powering and managing

of workplace into sophisticated format that meet the goals of modern development. Great

Britain gave birth to industrial revolution with intense investment in technological

innovations. This great turning point globally impacted almost every facets of life.

Consequently, the level of distribution between the rich and the poor create gully in income

per capital between developing and developed countries. Economics growth indices have

been used to show that industrial revolution has positive correlation to modern state system

development. The focus of this work is to explored the impact of industrial resolution to

modern state system. It critically explored the basis of industrial revolution and its

metamorphosis to modern state system. The study used exploratory method both primary and

secondary facts were collated through the use of interview and review of documented facts.

Capitalist theory was used as the study conceptual theoretical framework. It was largely

agreed upon that Industrial revolution impacted positively on transformation of economic and

sociopolitical systems across the globe through introduction of machine and factories

development. It was recommended that Political Elites and Leaders in developing nations

across the globe need to understand and apply the principles of industrial revolution as state

policy; in order to improve the lots of their subjects and create enable environment for

modern state system.

Keywords: Industrial revolution, modern state system, capitalist, transformation of economics, sociopolitical

development

INTRODUCTION
Industrial revolution is the transformation from old fashion means of powering and managing

of workplace into sophisticated format that meet the goals of modern development. It was

the transition to new manufacturing processes in Europe and the US, in the period from about

1760 to sometime between 1820 and 1840. It embraced the changing from manual processes

to mechanized processes, especially in the spinning processes of the textile material handling;

this saved cost, time and improved level of productivities. The industrial revolution also gave

birth to increase in the rate of population growth.

Textiles industries were the major case study of the industrial revolution in terms of large

scale employment, level of output and capital invested. It was the first to use modern

production approaches. (Landes , 1969).

Great Britain gave birth to industrial revolution with intense investment in technological innovations.

(Horn, et al. 2010; Wrigley, 2018), B y the mid-18th century Britain has became the world's

leading commercial nation, ((Reisman, 1998); controlling a global trading empire with the used of

instrument of colonization and mass media propagation; they have colonies in North America and the

Caribbean, and with well established political system in the Indian subcontinent, through the activities

of the East India Company. (Landes, 1999). Since, the history of mass media emanated from man

struggle for liberty and freedom, which include freedom of expression, freedom to write and express

oneself; especially on issues of industrial revolution. This struggle was given deep consideration in

18th century, (Paul Sanyaolu, 2017).

The development of trade and the rise of business were major causes of the Industrial Revolution.

(Landes, 1969).

The industrial revolution development into modern state system is better explained by

considering Paul Sanyaolu (2017) view of evolution and political behaviour. He claimed that

the complexity of political behaviour commences from a simple niche unit, called ward,
which if given proper attention, its growth can be controlled and coordinated. It can be

inferred that Great Britain was the niche unit of industrial revolution and origin of modern

state system.

Intellectual well established society regularly come together to fashioned way forward based

on science and technological application to manufacturing, chemical development,

engineering innovation by the network of informal philosophical societies. Such as the

London-based Royal Society of Arts and the London-based Royal Society of Science. The

latter formed the revolutionary committee that championed industrial revolution and modern

state system, (Stephenson, 2017).

Also, encouragement of knowledge of innovation acquisition spread by several means across

the Europe favoured the industrial revolution development. Manufacturing firms in Europe

made study tour their fundamental policy; this encouraged study tours to others developed

nations, such as United States of America to under study their manufacturing process;

gathered information on productivity improvement, and returned back to share it among the

working class for better productivity and quality improvement. People were honored based

on their contribution to human and physical development positive indices. Consequently,

independent study tour to France, Sweden, and Switzerland; became daily norms among the

people.

Further, training, on-the-job retraining and capacity development were encouraged among the

manufacturing and factory workers. Workers were trained on novel method of productivity

improvement and total quality management; these were shared among themselves for

massive positive impacts. Civil servants, technicians and professionals undertake study tours.

Since total quality management approaches are based on improving on efforts drawn on the

previously accompanied outcomes and methodologies of quality assurance and control, (Paul
Sanyaolu, 2015). These practice were common in developed nations like Great Britain and

America. Individual firms and factories invest heavily on study tours to improve their

techniques and approach of production.

This great turning point globally impacted almost every facets of life. Economically, the

mean income and population started to grow in geometrical progression; the most remarkable

impact of industrial revolution was increased in standard of the living of the people, (Luca,

2002; Feinstein, 1998; Szreter & Mooney; 1998).

A few work on development has been focused on the distribution of productivity in firms

across the globe; for instance, In Asia and Caribbean America ; such as China,, or Mexico,

the ratio of labor productivity of the top firms to bottom firms is on the order of 10:1; and 2:1

in the U.S. The quality of products have been on declined. Developing nations have bad

distributions, with the vast majority of their firms using low productivity technologies.

Consequently, the level of distribution, create gully in income per capita between developing

and developed countries. These factors have anchored on the availability of technological and

innovational development. And comparative advantage in factor costs, This is why the

developing country firms opted for sub-optimal level of inputs. Hence, low level of

productivity. Firms that are unproductive face low distortions,

Economics growth indices have been used to show that industrial revolution has positive

correlation to modern state system development. The Gross Domestic Product (GDP), per

capita has been reportedly stable before the industrial revolution and modern economic

growth due to impacts of capitalist economies, (Lucas, Jr. 2003; Lucas, 2003). The world

GDP have remained stagnated before the era of industrial revolution; this has grown at the

rate of 2.4 percent for the first sixty years of the 20th century, of one percent for the entire
19th century, of one-third of one percent for the 18th century, (era of industrial revolution).

Also, Economic historians supported the latter view; it was established facts that the events of

human endeavor experience great positive metamorphosis of the domestication and

transformation of animals and plants due to embraced of innovation in diversity, (McCloskey,

2004). This led to great Engineering materials development; especially in the iron

production; that accounted for structural transformation from agricultural outputs to

mechanized industrial inputs in Britain, especially in United Kingdom around 1760. (Keibek,

2016).

Industrial revolution led to positive transformation of economic and sociopolitical systems

across the globe through introduction of machine and factories development. (Hobsbawm,

1991; Inikori. 2005; Berg and Hudson, 1992; Lorenzen , 2005).

These great impacts sporadically spread throughout the Europe from Great Britain to United

States in the around 19th century, Belgium and United States were known with textile and

coal development around the same period, while France made great impacts in textile

development.

Before industrial revolution, British textile manufacturing industries could not compete with

those in Indian. The level of one fifth to one-sixth that of British's. (Gupta, 2016).

Immediately, when industrial revolution set in Indian textile manufacturing industries could

not be compared to those in Britain, due to exponential increase in productivity.

Also, politically, British government enact policies and set up laws that protected the

domestic textile manufacturing industries. Between 1700 to 1721, the British government

passed the Calico Acts to protect the local woolen and linen industries from closed down, due

to increased in level of cotton fabric imported from India, (Ayres, 1989).

CONCEPTUAL THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK

Capitalist theory states that the rich will continue to get richer while the poor and lazy hands

will continue to get poorer. The British advance was due to the presence of an entrepreneurial

class which believed in progress, technology and hard work.(Foster, 2004) This theory

established that capital accumulation and wealth concentration in an entrepreneurial culture

following the industrial revolution made the industrial revolution possible.

CONCLUSION

Industrial revolution impacted positively on transformation of economic and sociopolitical

systems across the globe through introduction of machine and factories development., in

order to form modern state system.

RECOMMENDATION

Political Elites and Leaders in developing nations across the globe need to understand and

apply the principles of industrial revolution as state policy; in order to improve the lots of

their subjects and create enable environment for modern state system.

REFERENCES

1. David S. Landes (1969). The Unbound Prometheus. Press Syndicate of the University

of Cambridge. ISBN 978-0-521-09418-4.

2. Horn, Jeff; Rosenband, Leonard; Smith, Merritt (2010). Reconceptualizing the

Industrial Revolution. Cambridge MA, London: MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-51562-

7.
3. E. Anthony Wrigley, (2018), "Reconsidering the Industrial Revolution: England and

Wales." Journal of Interdisciplinary History 49.01: 9–42.

4. Reisman, George (1998). Capitalism: A complete understanding of the nature and

value of human economic life. Jameson Books. p. 127. ISBN 0-915463-73-3.

5. Landes, David (1999). The Wealth and Poverty of Nations. W.W. Norton &

Company. ISBN 978-0-393-31888-3.

6. Lucas, Robert E., Jr. (2002). Lectures on Economic Growth. Cambridge: Harvard

University Press. pp. 109–10. ISBN 978-0-674-01601-9.

7. Feinstein, Charles (1998). "Pessimism Perpetuated: Real Wages and the Standard of

Living in Britain during and after the Industrial Revolution". Journal of Economic

History. 58 (3): 625–58. doi:10.1017/s0022050700021100.

8. Szreter & Mooney; Mooney (1998). "Urbanization, Mortality, and the Standard of

Living Debate: New Estimates of the Expectation of Life at Birth in Nineteenth-

Century British Cities". The Economic History Review. 51 (1): 104.

doi:10.1111/1468-0289.00084.

9. Robert Lucas, Jr. (2003). "The Industrial Revolution". Federal Reserve Bank of

Minneapolis.

10. Lucas, Robert (2003). "The Industrial Revolution Past and Future".

11. McCloskey, Deidre (2004). "Review of The Cambridge Economic History of Modern

Britain (edited by Roderick Floud and Paul Johnson), Times Higher Education

Supplement, 15 January 2004".

 12. Keibek, Sebastiaan A.J. (2016). The male occupational structure of England and

Wales, 1600–1850 (PhD). University of Cambridge.

13. Eric Hobsbawm, (1991), The Age of Revolution: Europe 1789–1848, Weidenfeld &

Nicolson Ltd., p. 27 ISBN 0-349-10484-0

14. Joseph E Inikori. (2005), Africans and the Industrial Revolution in England,

Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-01079-9Read it

15. Berg, Maxine; Hudson, Pat (1992). "Rehabilitating the Industrial Revolution". The

Economic History Review. 45 (1): 24–50. doi:10.2307/2598327. JSTOR 2598327.

16. Julie Lorenzen , (2005), Rehabilitating the Industrial Revolution Archived 9

November 2006 at the Wayback Machine by, Central Michigan University. Retrieved

November 2006.

17. Foster, Charles (2004). Capital and Innovation: How Britain Became the First

Industrial Nation. Northwich: Arley Hall Press. ISBN 978-0-9518382-4-2.

18. Stephenson, Judy Z. (2017). "'Real' wages? Contractors, workers, and pay in London

building trades, 1650–1800". The Economic History Review. 71 (1): 106–32.

doi:10.1111/ehr.12491. ISSN 0013-0117.

19. Gupta, Bishnupriya (2016). "Cotton Textiles and the Great Divergence: Lancashire,

India and Shifting Competitive Advantage, 1600–1850" (PDF). International Institute

of Social History. Department of Economics, University of Warwick.

ABSTRACT
Industrial revolution is the transformation from old fashion means of powering and managing

of workplace into sophisticated format that meet the goals of modern development. Great

Britain gave birth to industrial revolution with intense investment in technological

innovations. This great turning point globally impacted almost every facets of life.

Consequently, the level of distribution between the rich and the poor create gully in income

per capital between developing and developed countries. Economics growth indices have

been used to show that industrial revolution has positive correlation to modern state system

development. The focus of this work is to explored the impact of industrial resolution to

modern state system. It critically explored the basis of industrial revolution and its

metamorphosis to modern state system. The study used exploratory method both primary and

secondary facts were collated through the use of interview and review of documented facts.

Capitalist theory was used as the study conceptual theoretical framework. It was largely

agreed upon that Industrial revolution impacted positively on transformation of economic and

sociopolitical systems across the globe through introduction of machine and factories

development. It was recommended that Political Elites and Leaders in developing nations

across the globe need to understand and apply the principles of industrial revolution as state

policy; in order to improve the lots of their subjects and create enable environment for

modern state system.

Keywords: Industrial revolution, modern state system, capitalist, transformation of economics, sociopolitical

development

INTRODUCTION

Industrial revolution is the transformation from old fashion means of powering and managing

of workplace into sophisticated format that meet the goals of modern development. It was

the transition to new manufacturing processes in Europe and the US, in the period from about
1760 to sometime between 1820 and 1840. It embraced the changing from manual processes

to mechanized processes, especially in the spinning processes of the textile material handling;

this saved cost, time and improved level of productivities. The industrial revolution also gave

birth to increase in the rate of population growth.

Textiles industries were the major case study of the industrial revolution in terms of large

scale employment, level of output and capital invested. It was the first to use modern

production approaches. (Landes , 1969).

Great Britain gave birth to industrial revolution with intense investment in technological innovations.

(Horn, et al. 2010; Wrigley, 2018), B y the mid-18th century Britain has became the world's

leading commercial nation, ((Reisman, 1998); controlling a global trading empire with the used of

instrument of colonization and mass media propagation; they have colonies in North America and the

Caribbean, and with well established political system in the Indian subcontinent, through the activities

of the East India Company. (Landes, 1999). Since, the history of mass media emanated from man

struggle for liberty and freedom, which include freedom of expression, freedom to write and express

oneself; especially on issues of industrial revolution. This struggle was given deep consideration in

18th century, (Paul Sanyaolu, 2017).

The development of trade and the rise of business were major causes of the Industrial Revolution.

(Landes, 1969).

The industrial revolution development into modern state system is better explained by

considering Paul Sanyaolu (2017) view of evolution and political behaviour. He claimed that

the complexity of political behaviour commences from a simple niche unit, called ward,

which if given proper attention, its growth can be controlled and coordinated. It can be

inferred that Great Britain was the niche unit of industrial revolution and origin of modern

state system.
Intellectual well established society regularly come together to fashioned way forward based

on science and technological application to manufacturing, chemical development,

engineering innovation by the network of informal philosophical societies. Such as the

London-based Royal Society of Arts and the London-based Royal Society of Science. The

latter formed the revolutionary committee that championed industrial revolution and modern

state system, (Stephenson, 2017).

Also, encouragement of knowledge of innovation acquisition spread by several means across

the Europe favoured the industrial revolution development. Manufacturing firms in Europe

made study tour their fundamental policy; this encouraged study tours to others developed

nations, such as United States of America to under study their manufacturing process;

gathered information on productivity improvement, and returned back to share it among the

working class for better productivity and quality improvement. People were honored based

on their contribution to human and physical development positive indices. Consequently,

independent study tour to France, Sweden, and Switzerland; became daily norms among the

people.

Further, training, on-the-job retraining and capacity development were encouraged among the

manufacturing and factory workers. Workers were trained on novel method of productivity

improvement and total quality management; these were shared among themselves for

massive positive impacts. Civil servants, technicians and professionals undertake study tours.

Since total quality management approaches are based on improving on efforts drawn on the

previously accompanied outcomes and methodologies of quality assurance and control, (Paul

Sanyaolu, 2015). These practice were common in developed nations like Great Britain and

America. Individual firms and factories invest heavily on study tours to improve their

techniques and approach of production.

This great turning point globally impacted almost every facets of life. Economically, the

mean income and population started to grow in geometrical progression; the most remarkable

impact of industrial revolution was increased in standard of the living of the people, (Luca,

2002; Feinstein, 1998; Szreter & Mooney; 1998).

A few work on development has been focused on the distribution of productivity in firms

across the globe; for instance, In Asia and Caribbean America ; such as China,, or Mexico,

the ratio of labor productivity of the top firms to bottom firms is on the order of 10:1; and 2:1

in the U.S. The quality of products have been on declined. Developing nations have bad

distributions, with the vast majority of their firms using low productivity technologies.

Consequently, the level of distribution, create gully in income per capita between developing

and developed countries. These factors have anchored on the availability of technological and

innovational development. And comparative advantage in factor costs, This is why the

developing country firms opted for sub-optimal level of inputs. Hence, low level of

productivity. Firms that are unproductive face low distortions,

Economics growth indices have been used to show that industrial revolution has positive

correlation to modern state system development. The Gross Domestic Product (GDP), per

capita has been reportedly stable before the industrial revolution and modern economic

growth due to impacts of capitalist economies, (Lucas, Jr. 2003; Lucas, 2003). The world

GDP have remained stagnated before the era of industrial revolution; this has grown at the

rate of 2.4 percent for the first sixty years of the 20th century, of one percent for the entire

19th century, of one-third of one percent for the 18th century, (era of industrial revolution).

Also, Economic historians supported the latter view; it was established facts that the events of

human endeavor experience great positive metamorphosis of the domestication and

transformation of animals and plants due to embraced of innovation in diversity, (McCloskey,

2004). This led to great Engineering materials development; especially in the iron

production; that accounted for structural transformation from agricultural outputs to

mechanized industrial inputs in Britain, especially in United Kingdom around 1760. (Keibek,

2016).

Industrial revolution led to positive transformation of economic and sociopolitical systems

across the globe through introduction of machine and factories development. (Hobsbawm,

1991; Inikori. 2005; Berg and Hudson, 1992; Lorenzen , 2005).

These great impacts sporadically spread throughout the Europe from Great Britain to United

States in the around 19th century, Belgium and United States were known with textile and

coal development around the same period, while France made great impacts in textile

development.

Before industrial revolution, British textile manufacturing industries could not compete with

those in Indian. The level of one fifth to one-sixth that of British's. (Gupta, 2016).

Immediately, when industrial revolution set in Indian textile manufacturing industries could

not be compared to those in Britain, due to exponential increase in productivity.

Also, politically, British government enact policies and set up laws that protected the

domestic textile manufacturing industries. Between 1700 to 1721, the British government

passed the Calico Acts to protect the local woolen and linen industries from closed down, due

to increased in level of cotton fabric imported from India, (Ayres, 1989).

CONCEPTUAL THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK

Capitalist theory states that the rich will continue to get richer while the poor and lazy hands

will continue to get poorer. The British advance was due to the presence of an entrepreneurial

class which believed in progress, technology and hard work.(Foster, 2004) This theory

established that capital accumulation and wealth concentration in an entrepreneurial culture

following the industrial revolution made the industrial revolution possible.

CONCLUSION

Industrial revolution impacted positively on transformation of economic and sociopolitical

systems across the globe through introduction of machine and factories development., in

order to form modern state system.

RECOMMENDATION

Political Elites and Leaders in developing nations across the globe need to understand and

apply the principles of industrial revolution as state policy; in order to improve the lots of

their subjects and create enable environment for modern state system.

REFERENCES

ABSTRACT

Industrial revolution is the transformation from old fashion means of powering and managing

of workplace into sophisticated format that meet the goals of modern development. Great

Britain gave birth to industrial revolution with intense investment in technological

innovations. This great turning point globally impacted almost every facets of life.

Consequently, the level of distribution between the rich and the poor create gully in income

per capital between developing and developed countries. Economics growth indices have

been used to show that industrial revolution has positive correlation to modern state system
development. The focus of this work is to explored the impact of industrial resolution to

modern state system. It critically explored the basis of industrial revolution and its

metamorphosis to modern state system. The study used exploratory method both primary and

secondary facts were collated through the use of interview and review of documented facts.

Capitalist theory was used as the study conceptual theoretical framework. It was largely

agreed upon that Industrial revolution impacted positively on transformation of economic and

sociopolitical systems across the globe through introduction of machine and factories

development. It was recommended that Political Elites and Leaders in developing nations

across the globe need to understand and apply the principles of industrial revolution as state

policy; in order to improve the lots of their subjects and create enable environment for

modern state system.

Keywords: Industrial revolution, modern state system, capitalist, transformation of economics, sociopolitical

development

INTRODUCTION

Industrial revolution is the transformation from old fashion means of powering and managing

of workplace into sophisticated format that meet the goals of modern development. It was

the transition to new manufacturing processes in Europe and the US, in the period from about

1760 to sometime between 1820 and 1840. It embraced the changing from manual processes

to mechanized processes, especially in the spinning processes of the textile material handling;

this saved cost, time and improved level of productivities. The industrial revolution also gave

birth to increase in the rate of population growth.

Textiles industries were the major case study of the industrial revolution in terms of large

scale employment, level of output and capital invested. It was the first to use modern

production approaches. (Landes , 1969).

Great Britain gave birth to industrial revolution with intense investment in technological innovations.

(Horn, et al. 2010; Wrigley, 2018), B y the mid-18th century Britain has became the world's

leading commercial nation, ((Reisman, 1998); controlling a global trading empire with the used of

instrument of colonization and mass media propagation; they have colonies in North America and the

Caribbean, and with well established political system in the Indian subcontinent, through the activities

of the East India Company. (Landes, 1999). Since, the history of mass media emanated from man

struggle for liberty and freedom, which include freedom of expression, freedom to write and express

oneself; especially on issues of industrial revolution. This struggle was given deep consideration in

18th century, (Paul Sanyaolu, 2017).

The development of trade and the rise of business were major causes of the Industrial Revolution.

(Landes, 1969).

The industrial revolution development into modern state system is better explained by

considering Paul Sanyaolu (2017) view of evolution and political behaviour. He claimed that

the complexity of political behaviour commences from a simple niche unit, called ward,

which if given proper attention, its growth can be controlled and coordinated. It can be

inferred that Great Britain was the niche unit of industrial revolution and origin of modern

state system.

Intellectual well established society regularly come together to fashioned way forward based

on science and technological application to manufacturing, chemical development,

engineering innovation by the network of informal philosophical societies. Such as the

London-based Royal Society of Arts and the London-based Royal Society of Science. The

latter formed the revolutionary committee that championed industrial revolution and modern

state system, (Stephenson, 2017).

Also, encouragement of knowledge of innovation acquisition spread by several means across

the Europe favoured the industrial revolution development. Manufacturing firms in Europe

made study tour their fundamental policy; this encouraged study tours to others developed

nations, such as United States of America to under study their manufacturing process;

gathered information on productivity improvement, and returned back to share it among the

working class for better productivity and quality improvement. People were honored based

on their contribution to human and physical development positive indices. Consequently,

independent study tour to France, Sweden, and Switzerland; became daily norms among the

people.

Further, training, on-the-job retraining and capacity development were encouraged among the

manufacturing and factory workers. Workers were trained on novel method of productivity

improvement and total quality management; these were shared among themselves for

massive positive impacts. Civil servants, technicians and professionals undertake study tours.

Since total quality management approaches are based on improving on efforts drawn on the

previously accompanied outcomes and methodologies of quality assurance and control, (Paul

Sanyaolu, 2015). These practice were common in developed nations like Great Britain and

America. Individual firms and factories invest heavily on study tours to improve their

techniques and approach of production.

This great turning point globally impacted almost every facets of life. Economically, the

mean income and population started to grow in geometrical progression; the most remarkable

impact of industrial revolution was increased in standard of the living of the people, (Luca,

2002; Feinstein, 1998; Szreter & Mooney; 1998).

A few work on development has been focused on the distribution of productivity in firms

across the globe; for instance, In Asia and Caribbean America ; such as China,, or Mexico,
the ratio of labor productivity of the top firms to bottom firms is on the order of 10:1; and 2:1

in the U.S. The quality of products have been on declined. Developing nations have bad

distributions, with the vast majority of their firms using low productivity technologies.

Consequently, the level of distribution, create gully in income per capita between developing

and developed countries. These factors have anchored on the availability of technological and

innovational development. And comparative advantage in factor costs, This is why the

developing country firms opted for sub-optimal level of inputs. Hence, low level of

productivity. Firms that are unproductive face low distortions,

Economics growth indices have been used to show that industrial revolution has positive

correlation to modern state system development. The Gross Domestic Product (GDP), per

capita has been reportedly stable before the industrial revolution and modern economic

growth due to impacts of capitalist economies, (Lucas, Jr. 2003; Lucas, 2003). The world

GDP have remained stagnated before the era of industrial revolution; this has grown at the

rate of 2.4 percent for the first sixty years of the 20th century, of one percent for the entire

19th century, of one-third of one percent for the 18th century, (era of industrial revolution).

Also, Economic historians supported the latter view; it was established facts that the events of

human endeavor experience great positive metamorphosis of the domestication and

transformation of animals and plants due to embraced of innovation in diversity, (McCloskey,

2004). This led to great Engineering materials development; especially in the iron

production; that accounted for structural transformation from agricultural outputs to

mechanized industrial inputs in Britain, especially in United Kingdom around 1760. (Keibek,

2016).
Industrial revolution led to positive transformation of economic and sociopolitical systems

across the globe through introduction of machine and factories development. (Hobsbawm,

1991; Inikori. 2005; Berg and Hudson, 1992; Lorenzen , 2005).

These great impacts sporadically spread throughout the Europe from Great Britain to United

States in the around 19th century, Belgium and United States were known with textile and

coal development around the same period, while France made great impacts in textile

development.

Before industrial revolution, British textile manufacturing industries could not compete with

those in Indian. The level of one fifth to one-sixth that of British's. (Gupta, 2016).

Immediately, when industrial revolution set in Indian textile manufacturing industries could

not be compared to those in Britain, due to exponential increase in productivity.

Also, politically, British government enact policies and set up laws that protected the

domestic textile manufacturing industries. Between 1700 to 1721, the British government

passed the Calico Acts to protect the local woolen and linen industries from closed down, due

to increased in level of cotton fabric imported from India, (Ayres, 1989).

CONCEPTUAL THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK

Capitalist theory states that the rich will continue to get richer while the poor and lazy hands

will continue to get poorer. The British advance was due to the presence of an entrepreneurial

class which believed in progress, technology and hard work.(Foster, 2004) This theory

established that capital accumulation and wealth concentration in an entrepreneurial culture

following the industrial revolution made the industrial revolution possible.

CONCLUSION
Industrial revolution impacted positively on transformation of economic and sociopolitical

systems across the globe through introduction of machine and factories development., in

order to form modern state system.

RECOMMENDATION

Political Elites and Leaders in developing nations across the globe need to understand and

apply the principles of industrial revolution as state policy; in order to improve the lots of

their subjects and create enable environment for modern state system.

REFERENCES

ABSTRACT

Industrial revolution is the transformation from old fashion means of powering and managing

of workplace into sophisticated format that meet the goals of modern development. Great

Britain gave birth to industrial revolution with intense investment in technological

innovations. This great turning point globally impacted almost every facets of life.

Consequently, the level of distribution between the rich and the poor create gully in income

per capital between developing and developed countries. Economics growth indices have

been used to show that industrial revolution has positive correlation to modern state system

development. The focus of this work is to explored the impact of industrial resolution to

modern state system. It critically explored the basis of industrial revolution and its

metamorphosis to modern state system. The study used exploratory method both primary and

secondary facts were collated through the use of interview and review of documented facts.

Capitalist theory was used as the study conceptual theoretical framework. It was largely

agreed upon that Industrial revolution impacted positively on transformation of economic and

sociopolitical systems across the globe through introduction of machine and factories
development. It was recommended that Political Elites and Leaders in developing nations

across the globe need to understand and apply the principles of industrial revolution as state

policy; in order to improve the lots of their subjects and create enable environment for

modern state system.

Keywords: Industrial revolution, modern state system, capitalist, transformation of economics, sociopolitical

development

INTRODUCTION

Industrial revolution is the transformation from old fashion means of powering and managing

of workplace into sophisticated format that meet the goals of modern development. It was

the transition to new manufacturing processes in Europe and the US, in the period from about

1760 to sometime between 1820 and 1840. It embraced the changing from manual processes

to mechanized processes, especially in the spinning processes of the textile material handling;

this saved cost, time and improved level of productivities. The industrial revolution also gave

birth to increase in the rate of population growth.

Textiles industries were the major case study of the industrial revolution in terms of large

scale employment, level of output and capital invested. It was the first to use modern

production approaches. (Landes , 1969).

Great Britain gave birth to industrial revolution with intense investment in technological innovations.

(Horn, et al. 2010; Wrigley, 2018), B y the mid-18th century Britain has became the world's

leading commercial nation, ((Reisman, 1998); controlling a global trading empire with the used of

instrument of colonization and mass media propagation; they have colonies in North America and the

Caribbean, and with well established political system in the Indian subcontinent, through the activities

of the East India Company. (Landes, 1999). Since, the history of mass media emanated from man
struggle for liberty and freedom, which include freedom of expression, freedom to write and express

oneself; especially on issues of industrial revolution. This struggle was given deep consideration in

18th century, (Paul Sanyaolu, 2017).

The development of trade and the rise of business were major causes of the Industrial Revolution.

(Landes, 1969).

The industrial revolution development into modern state system is better explained by

considering Paul Sanyaolu (2017) view of evolution and political behaviour. He claimed that

the complexity of political behaviour commences from a simple niche unit, called ward,

which if given proper attention, its growth can be controlled and coordinated. It can be

inferred that Great Britain was the niche unit of industrial revolution and origin of modern

state system.

Intellectual well established society regularly come together to fashioned way forward based

on science and technological application to manufacturing, chemical development,

engineering innovation by the network of informal philosophical societies. Such as the

London-based Royal Society of Arts and the London-based Royal Society of Science. The

latter formed the revolutionary committee that championed industrial revolution and modern

state system, (Stephenson, 2017).

Also, encouragement of knowledge of innovation acquisition spread by several means across

the Europe favoured the industrial revolution development. Manufacturing firms in Europe

made study tour their fundamental policy; this encouraged study tours to others developed

nations, such as United States of America to under study their manufacturing process;

gathered information on productivity improvement, and returned back to share it among the

working class for better productivity and quality improvement. People were honored based
on their contribution to human and physical development positive indices. Consequently,

independent study tour to France, Sweden, and Switzerland; became daily norms among the

people.

Further, training, on-the-job retraining and capacity development were encouraged among the

manufacturing and factory workers. Workers were trained on novel method of productivity

improvement and total quality management; these were shared among themselves for

massive positive impacts. Civil servants, technicians and professionals undertake study tours.

Since total quality management approaches are based on improving on efforts drawn on the

previously accompanied outcomes and methodologies of quality assurance and control, (Paul

Sanyaolu, 2015). These practice were common in developed nations like Great Britain and

America. Individual firms and factories invest heavily on study tours to improve their

techniques and approach of production.

This great turning point globally impacted almost every facets of life. Economically, the

mean income and population started to grow in geometrical progression; the most remarkable

impact of industrial revolution was increased in standard of the living of the people, (Luca,

2002; Feinstein, 1998; Szreter & Mooney; 1998).

A few work on development has been focused on the distribution of productivity in firms

across the globe; for instance, In Asia and Caribbean America ; such as China,, or Mexico,

the ratio of labor productivity of the top firms to bottom firms is on the order of 10:1; and 2:1

in the U.S. The quality of products have been on declined. Developing nations have bad

distributions, with the vast majority of their firms using low productivity technologies.

Consequently, the level of distribution, create gully in income per capita between developing

and developed countries. These factors have anchored on the availability of technological and
innovational development. And comparative advantage in factor costs, This is why the

developing country firms opted for sub-optimal level of inputs. Hence, low level of

productivity. Firms that are unproductive face low distortions,

Economics growth indices have been used to show that industrial revolution has positive

correlation to modern state system development. The Gross Domestic Product (GDP), per

capita has been reportedly stable before the industrial revolution and modern economic

growth due to impacts of capitalist economies, (Lucas, Jr. 2003; Lucas, 2003). The world

GDP have remained stagnated before the era of industrial revolution; this has grown at the

rate of 2.4 percent for the first sixty years of the 20th century, of one percent for the entire

19th century, of one-third of one percent for the 18th century, (era of industrial revolution).

Also, Economic historians supported the latter view; it was established facts that the events of

human endeavor experience great positive metamorphosis of the domestication and

transformation of animals and plants due to embraced of innovation in diversity, (McCloskey,

2004). This led to great Engineering materials development; especially in the iron

production; that accounted for structural transformation from agricultural outputs to

mechanized industrial inputs in Britain, especially in United Kingdom around 1760. (Keibek,

2016).

Industrial revolution led to positive transformation of economic and sociopolitical systems

across the globe through introduction of machine and factories development. (Hobsbawm,

1991; Inikori. 2005; Berg and Hudson, 1992; Lorenzen , 2005).

These great impacts sporadically spread throughout the Europe from Great Britain to United

States in the around 19th century, Belgium and United States were known with textile and

coal development around the same period, while France made great impacts in textile

development.
Before industrial revolution, British textile manufacturing industries could not compete with

those in Indian. The level of one fifth to one-sixth that of British's. (Gupta, 2016).

Immediately, when industrial revolution set in Indian textile manufacturing industries could

not be compared to those in Britain, due to exponential increase in productivity.

Also, politically, British government enact policies and set up laws that protected the

domestic textile manufacturing industries. Between 1700 to 1721, the British government

passed the Calico Acts to protect the local woolen and linen industries from closed down, due

to increased in level of cotton fabric imported from India, (Ayres, 1989).

CONCEPTUAL THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK

Capitalist theory states that the rich will continue to get richer while the poor and lazy hands

will continue to get poorer. The British advance was due to the presence of an entrepreneurial

class which believed in progress, technology and hard work.(Foster, 2004) This theory

established that capital accumulation and wealth concentration in an entrepreneurial culture

following the industrial revolution made the industrial revolution possible.

CONCLUSION

Industrial revolution impacted positively on transformation of economic and sociopolitical

systems across the globe through introduction of machine and factories development., in

order to form modern state system.

RECOMMENDATION

Political Elites and Leaders in developing nations across the globe need to understand and

apply the principles of industrial revolution as state policy; in order to improve the lots of

their subjects and create enable environment for modern state system.
REFERENCES

1. Ayres, Robert (1989). "Technological Transformations and Long Waves" (PDF): 16–

17. Archived from the original (PDF) on 7 July 2012.

2. David S. Landes (1969). The Unbound Prometheus. Press Syndicate of the University

of Cambridge. ISBN 978-0-521-09418-4.

3. Horn, Jeff; Rosenband, Leonard; Smith, Merritt (2010). Reconceptualizing the

Industrial Revolution. Cambridge MA, London: MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-51562-

7.

4. E. Anthony Wrigley, (2018), "Reconsidering the Industrial Revolution: England and

Wales." Journal of Interdisciplinary History 49.01: 9–42.

5. Reisman, George (1998). Capitalism: A complete understanding of the nature and

value of human economic life. Jameson Books. p. 127. ISBN 0-915463-73-3.

6. Landes, David (1999). The Wealth and Poverty of Nations. W.W. Norton &

Company. ISBN 978-0-393-31888-3.

7. Lucas, Robert E., Jr. (2002). Lectures on Economic Growth. Cambridge: Harvard

University Press. pp. 109–10. ISBN 978-0-674-01601-9.

8. Feinstein, Charles (1998). "Pessimism Perpetuated: Real Wages and the Standard of

Living in Britain during and after the Industrial Revolution". Journal of Economic

History. 58 (3): 625–58. doi:10.1017/s0022050700021100.

9. Szreter & Mooney; Mooney (1998). "Urbanization, Mortality, and the Standard of

Living Debate: New Estimates of the Expectation of Life at Birth in Nineteenth-

Century British Cities". The Economic History Review. 51 (1): 104.

doi:10.1111/1468-0289.00084.

10. Robert Lucas, Jr. (2003). "The Industrial Revolution". Federal Reserve Bank of

Minneapolis.

11. Lucas, Robert (2003). "The Industrial Revolution Past and Future".

12. McCloskey, Deidre (2004). "Review of The Cambridge Economic History of Modern

Britain (edited by Roderick Floud and Paul Johnson), Times Higher Education

Supplement, 15 January 2004".

13. Keibek, Sebastiaan A.J. (2016). The male occupational structure of England and

Wales, 1600–1850 (PhD). University of Cambridge.

14. Eric Hobsbawm, (1991), The Age of Revolution: Europe 1789–1848, Weidenfeld &

Nicolson Ltd., p. 27 ISBN 0-349-10484-0

15. Joseph E Inikori. (2005), Africans and the Industrial Revolution in England,

Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-01079-9Read it

16. Berg, Maxine; Hudson, Pat (1992). "Rehabilitating the Industrial Revolution". The

Economic History Review. 45 (1): 24–50. doi:10.2307/2598327. JSTOR 2598327.

17. Julie Lorenzen , (2005), Rehabilitating the Industrial Revolution Archived 9

November 2006 at the Wayback Machine by, Central Michigan University. Retrieved

November 2006.
18. Foster, Charles (2004). Capital and Innovation: How Britain Became the First

Industrial Nation. Northwich: Arley Hall Press. ISBN 978-0-9518382-4-2.

19. Stephenson, Judy Z. (2017). "'Real' wages? Contractors, workers, and pay in London

building trades, 1650–1800". The Economic History Review. 71 (1): 106–32.

doi:10.1111/ehr.12491. ISSN 0013-0117.

20. Gupta, Bishnupriya (2016). "Cotton Textiles and the Great Divergence: Lancashire,

India and Shifting Competitive Advantage, 1600–1850" (PDF). International Institute

of Social History. Department of Economics, University of Warwick.

21. Paul Sanyaolu; O. C. Sanyaolu; O. P. Inegbenebor; A. I. Inegbenebor; Peter Omale

and O. O. Ogundiran (2015), Total Quality Management Practice in Chemistry

Teacher Preparation Implication for Vision 20-20:20; Research Gate Open Access

Journal: DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32909.03046

22. Paul Sanyaolu; O. C. Sanyaolu and O. Oni (2017), The Importance of Media in

Politics: Reseach Gate Open Access Journal: DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33223.60322

23. Paul Sanyaolu; O. C. Sanyaolu and O. Oni (2017), How does Evolution Theory

Explains Political Behaviour: Reseach Gate Open Access Journal: DOI:

10.13140/RG.2.2.22318.41285

1.
2. David S. Landes (1969). The Unbound Prometheus. Press Syndicate of the University

of Cambridge. ISBN 978-0-521-09418-4.

3. Horn, Jeff; Rosenband, Leonard; Smith, Merritt (2010). Reconceptualizing the

Industrial Revolution. Cambridge MA, London: MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-51562-

7.

4. E. Anthony Wrigley, (2018), "Reconsidering the Industrial Revolution: England and

Wales." Journal of Interdisciplinary History 49.01: 9–42.

5. Reisman, George (1998). Capitalism: A complete understanding of the nature and

value of human economic life. Jameson Books. p. 127. ISBN 0-915463-73-3.

6. Landes, David (1999). The Wealth and Poverty of Nations. W.W. Norton &

Company. ISBN 978-0-393-31888-3.

7. Lucas, Robert E., Jr. (2002). Lectures on Economic Growth. Cambridge: Harvard

University Press. pp. 109–10. ISBN 978-0-674-01601-9.

8. Feinstein, Charles (1998). "Pessimism Perpetuated: Real Wages and the Standard of

Living in Britain during and after the Industrial Revolution". Journal of Economic

History. 58 (3): 625–58. doi:10.1017/s0022050700021100.

9. Szreter & Mooney; Mooney (1998). "Urbanization, Mortality, and the Standard of

Living Debate: New Estimates of the Expectation of Life at Birth in Nineteenth-

Century British Cities". The Economic History Review. 51 (1): 104.

doi:10.1111/1468-0289.00084.
10. Robert Lucas, Jr. (2003). "The Industrial Revolution". Federal Reserve Bank of

Minneapolis.

11. Lucas, Robert (2003). "The Industrial Revolution Past and Future".

12. McCloskey, Deidre (2004). "Review of The Cambridge Economic History of Modern

Britain (edited by Roderick Floud and Paul Johnson), Times Higher Education

Supplement, 15 January 2004".

13. Keibek, Sebastiaan A.J. (2016). The male occupational structure of England and

Wales, 1600–1850 (PhD). University of Cambridge.

14. Eric Hobsbawm, (1991), The Age of Revolution: Europe 1789–1848, Weidenfeld &

Nicolson Ltd., p. 27 ISBN 0-349-10484-0

15. Joseph E Inikori. (2005), Africans and the Industrial Revolution in England,

Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-01079-9Read it

16. Berg, Maxine; Hudson, Pat (1992). "Rehabilitating the Industrial Revolution". The

Economic History Review. 45 (1): 24–50. doi:10.2307/2598327. JSTOR 2598327.

17. Julie Lorenzen , (2005), Rehabilitating the Industrial Revolution Archived 9

November 2006 at the Wayback Machine by, Central Michigan University. Retrieved

November 2006.

18. Foster, Charles (2004). Capital and Innovation: How Britain Became the First

Industrial Nation. Northwich: Arley Hall Press. ISBN 978-0-9518382-4-2.

19. Stephenson, Judy Z. (2017). "'Real' wages? Contractors, workers, and pay in London

building trades, 1650–1800". The Economic History Review. 71 (1): 106–32.

doi:10.1111/ehr.12491. ISSN 0013-0117.

20. Gupta, Bishnupriya (2016). "Cotton Textiles and the Great Divergence: Lancashire,

India and Shifting Competitive Advantage, 1600–1850" (PDF). International Institute

of Social History. Department of Economics, University of Warwick.

21. Ayres, Robert (1989). "Technological Transformations and Long Waves" (PDF):

16–17. Archived from the original (PDF) on 7 July 2012.

22. Paul Sanyaolu; O. C. Sanyaolu; O. P. Inegbenebor; A. I. Inegbenebor; Peter Omale

and O. O. Ogundiran (2015), Total Quality Management Practice in Chemistry

Teacher Preparation Implication for Vision 20-20:20; Research Gate Open Access

Journal: DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32909.03046

23. Paul Sanyaolu; O. C. Sanyaolu and O. Oni (2017), The Importance of Media in

Politics: Reseach Gate Open Access Journal: DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33223.60322

24. Paul Sanyaolu; O. C. Sanyaolu and O. Oni (2017), How does Evolution Theory

Explains Political Behaviour: Reseach Gate Open Access Journal: DOI:

10.13140/RG.2.2.22318.41285

1.
2. David S. Landes (1969). The Unbound Prometheus. Press Syndicate of the University

of Cambridge. ISBN 978-0-521-09418-4.

3. Horn, Jeff; Rosenband, Leonard; Smith, Merritt (2010). Reconceptualizing the

Industrial Revolution. Cambridge MA, London: MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-51562-

7.

4. E. Anthony Wrigley, (2018), "Reconsidering the Industrial Revolution: England and

Wales." Journal of Interdisciplinary History 49.01: 9–42.

5. Reisman, George (1998). Capitalism: A complete understanding of the nature and

value of human economic life. Jameson Books. p. 127. ISBN 0-915463-73-3.

6. Landes, David (1999). The Wealth and Poverty of Nations. W.W. Norton &

Company. ISBN 978-0-393-31888-3.

7. Lucas, Robert E., Jr. (2002). Lectures on Economic Growth. Cambridge: Harvard

University Press. pp. 109–10. ISBN 978-0-674-01601-9.

8. Feinstein, Charles (1998). "Pessimism Perpetuated: Real Wages and the Standard of

Living in Britain during and after the Industrial Revolution". Journal of Economic

History. 58 (3): 625–58. doi:10.1017/s0022050700021100.

9. Szreter & Mooney; Mooney (1998). "Urbanization, Mortality, and the Standard of

Living Debate: New Estimates of the Expectation of Life at Birth in Nineteenth-

Century British Cities". The Economic History Review. 51 (1): 104.

doi:10.1111/1468-0289.00084.
10. Robert Lucas, Jr. (2003). "The Industrial Revolution". Federal Reserve Bank of

Minneapolis.

11. Lucas, Robert (2003). "The Industrial Revolution Past and Future".

12. McCloskey, Deidre (2004). "Review of The Cambridge Economic History of Modern

Britain (edited by Roderick Floud and Paul Johnson), Times Higher Education

Supplement, 15 January 2004".

13. Keibek, Sebastiaan A.J. (2016). The male occupational structure of England and

Wales, 1600–1850 (PhD). University of Cambridge.

14. Eric Hobsbawm, (1991), The Age of Revolution: Europe 1789–1848, Weidenfeld &

Nicolson Ltd., p. 27 ISBN 0-349-10484-0

15. Joseph E Inikori. (2005), Africans and the Industrial Revolution in England,

Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-01079-9Read it

16. Berg, Maxine; Hudson, Pat (1992). "Rehabilitating the Industrial Revolution". The

Economic History Review. 45 (1): 24–50. doi:10.2307/2598327. JSTOR 2598327.

17. Julie Lorenzen , (2005), Rehabilitating the Industrial Revolution Archived 9

November 2006 at the Wayback Machine by, Central Michigan University. Retrieved

November 2006.

18. Foster, Charles (2004). Capital and Innovation: How Britain Became the First

Industrial Nation. Northwich: Arley Hall Press. ISBN 978-0-9518382-4-2.

19. Stephenson, Judy Z. (2017). "'Real' wages? Contractors, workers, and pay in London

building trades, 1650–1800". The Economic History Review. 71 (1): 106–32.

doi:10.1111/ehr.12491. ISSN 0013-0117.

20. Gupta, Bishnupriya (2016). "Cotton Textiles and the Great Divergence: Lancashire,

India and Shifting Competitive Advantage, 1600–1850" (PDF). International Institute

of Social History. Department of Economics, University of Warwick.

21. Ayres, Robert (1989). "Technological Transformations and Long Waves" (PDF):

16–17. Archived from the original (PDF) on 7 July 2012.

22. Paul Sanyaolu; O. C. Sanyaolu; O. P. Inegbenebor; A. I. Inegbenebor; Peter Omale

and O. O. Ogundiran (2015), Total Quality Management Practice in Chemistry

Teacher Preparation Implication for Vision 20-20:20; Research Gate Open Access

Journal: DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32909.03046

23. Paul Sanyaolu; O. C. Sanyaolu and O. Oni (2017), The Importance of Media in

Politics: Reseach Gate Open Access Journal: DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33223.60322

24. Paul Sanyaolu; O. C. Sanyaolu and O. Oni (2017), How does Evolution Theory

Explains Political Behaviour: Reseach Gate Open Access Journal: DOI:

10.13140/RG.2.2.22318.41285

20. Paul Sanyaolu; O. C. Sanyaolu; O. P. Inegbenebor; A. I. Inegbenebor; Peter Omale

and O. O. Ogundiran (2015), Total Quality Management Practice in Chemistry

 Teacher Preparation Implication for Vision 20-20:20; Research Gate Open Access

Journal: DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32909.03046

21. Paul Sanyaolu; O. C. Sanyaolu and O. Oni (2017), The Importance of Media in

Politics: Reseach Gate Open Access Journal: DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33223.60322

22. Paul Sanyaolu; O. C. Sanyaolu and O. Oni (2017), How does Evolution Theory

Explains Political Behaviour: Reseach Gate Open Access Journal: DOI:

10.13140/RG.2.2.22318.41285