The Politics of the Great Divergence and the Question about the Rise of the Middle Class

Abstract This review essay calls for involving political science in the conversation of interdisciplinary history, particularly concerning the scholarship on the Great Divergence. In past years, some institutionalist economic historians have advanced political explanations of modern economic growth centered on political participation. Nevertheless, the research findings in comparative political science do not empirically support their causal claims. Recent political scientists see politics as agency-based interactions that drive institutional change rather than as system-like natures of institutions. Although the politics of the Great Divergence is itself a classic intellectual agenda that has been discussed since Marx, it requires a reexamination with the latest knowledge. In particular, the dynamics of political competition between the dominant incumbent landed elites and the emerging middle class, and the latter’s eventual triumph, which occurred only in some countries and served as a major source of institutional change for modern economic growth therein, remains an unsolved puzzle.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
The Journal of Interdisciplinary History
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1162/jinh_a_02074
Primary Topic
Political Economy and Marxism
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Politics of the Great Divergence and the Question about the Rise of the Middle Class

Makio Yamada
1 links
The Journal of Interdisciplinary History
Political Economy and Marxism
article

The Politics of the Great Divergence and the Question about the Rise of the Middle Class

Makio Yamada
article en

Abstract

Abstract This review essay calls for involving political science in the conversation of interdisciplinary history, particularly concerning the scholarship on the Great Divergence. In past years, some institutionalist economic historians have advanced political explanations of modern economic growth centered on political participation. Nevertheless, the research findings in comparative political science do not empirically support their causal claims. Recent political scientists see politics as agency-based interactions that drive institutional change rather than as system-like natures of institutions. Although the politics of the Great Divergence is itself a classic intellectual agenda that has been discussed since Marx, it requires a reexamination with the latest knowledge. In particular, the dynamics of political competition between the dominant incumbent landed elites and the emerging middle class, and the latter’s eventual triumph, which occurred only in some countries and served as a major source of institutional change for modern economic growth therein, remains an unsolved puzzle.

The Journal of Interdisciplinary HistoryVol. 55(4)
Openalex Percentile: Top 85%
Political Economy and Marxism
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.