Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Makine Kırma Eylemlerinin Teorik Analizi: Gerschenkron, Polanyi ve Schumpeter Işığında Bir Okuma

Öz

Bu çalışma, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu'ndaki makine kırma eylemlerini geç sanayileşme teori ve yaklaşımları çerçevesinde analiz etmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Araştırmanın temel hipotezi, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’ndaki makine ve sanayi karşıtı eylemlerin yalnızca ekonomik kaygılarla değil, toplumsal ve kültürel yapıların korunması motivasyonuyla şekillendiğidir. Çalışmada Alexander Gerschenkron’un geç sanayileşme modeli, Joseph Schumpeter’in yaratıcı yıkım teorisi ve Karl Polanyi’nin gömülülükten ayrılma kavramı teorik temel olarak kullanılmıştır. Osmanlı arşiv belgeleri, dönemin gazete haberleri ve diğer kaynaklardan oluşan veriler ışığında karşılaştırmalı analiz yöntemi uygulanmıştır. Bulgular, Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda makineleşme ve şirketleşmenin geleneksel üretim ilişkilerini gerileterek, küçük esnaf ve işçiler arasında ekonomik güvencesizliği artırdığını ortaya koymaktadır. Ayrıca, eylemlerin toplumsal direnç ve kültürel kimlik kaygılarını yansıttığı gözlenmiştir. Sonuç olarak, Polanyi’nin gömülülük kavramının imparatorluktaki makine kırma eylemlerini açıklamada en kapsamlı teorik çerçeveyi sağladığı, Gerschenkron ve Schumpeter modellerinin ise ekonomik dönüşümlerin kısa vadeli etkilerini açıklamakla sınırlı kaldığı belirlenmiştir. Çalışma, Osmanlı sanayileşmesi üzerine yapılacak gelecek araştırmalar için sosyal ve kültürel dinamiklerin önemini vurgulayan teorik bir zemin oluşturmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Makine Kırma Eylemleri
• Osmanlı Sanayileşmesi
• Geç Sanayileşme
• Gömülülük Kavramı

Theoretical Analysis of Machine-Breaking Actions in the Ottoman Empire: A Reading Through Gerschenkron, Polanyi, and Schumpeter

Öz

This study examines machine-breaking actions in the Ottoman Empire in the context of late industrialisation concept. The acceleration of mechanisation and corporatisation in the Ottoman Empire resulted in economic insecurity among the workers and small artisans, whilst simultaneously posing a threat to long-standing relations of production and social structures. The present study employs a comparative analysis, drawing upon Alexander Gerschenkron's model of late industrialisation, Joseph Schumpeter's theory of creative destruction and Karl Polanyi's concept of disembeddedness. The findings demonstrate that Ottoman labour and artisan resistance was influenced not only by economic factors but also by the desire to preserve social and cultural structures. While Polanyi's theoretical approach offers the most powerful framework for explaining the Ottoman case, Gerschenkron and Schumpeter's models are limited in their ability to assess the short-term consequences of economic and technological change. The study's theoretical underpinnings offer a foundation for future research on Ottoman industrialisation, emphasising the evaluation of resistance movements within a social and cultural context.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Machine Breaking Actions
• Ottoman Industrialization
• Late Industrialization
• Disembeddedness Concept

Kaynakça

1. Ahmad, F. (1991). Politics and Islam in modern Turkey. Middle Eastern Studies, 27(1), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00263209108700843
2. Arrighi, G. (1990). The three hegemonies of historical capitalism. Review (Fernand Braudel Center), 13(3), 365–408.
3. Block, F. (2003). Karl Polanyi and the writing of the Great Transformation. Theory and Society, 32(3), 275–306. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024420102334
4. Block, F., & Somers, M. (1984). Beyond the economistic fallacy: The holistic social science of Karl Polanyi. In: Skocpol T. (Ed.), Vision and Method in Historical Sociology (pp:47-84). Cambridge University Press.
5. Bülbül, Y., & Özbay, R. D. (2007). Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda Teknolojiye Karşı Direncin İktisat Tarihi. İŞGÜÇ The Journal of Industrial Relations and Human Resources, 9(4), 19–41.
6. Chakrabarty, D. (1991). Open space/public place: Garbage, modernity and India. South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies, 14(1), 15–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/00856409108723146
7. Chakrabarty, D. (2009). Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial thought and historical difference . Princeton University Press.
8. Clark, E. C. (1974). The Ottoman industrial revolution. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 5(1), 65–76. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020743800032797

9. Clay, C. (1994). The origins of modern banking in the Levant: The branch network of the Imperial Ottoman Bank, 1890–1914. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 26(4), 589–614. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020743800061122
10. Coşar, N., & Demirci, S. (2009). Incorporation into the world economy: From railways to highways (1850–1950). Middle Eastern Studies, 45(1), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/00263200802547636
11. Craik, G. L. (1844). The history of British commerce: From the earliest times (Vol 1). C. Knight & Company. Dale, G. (2010). Karl Polanyi: The limits of the market. Polity Press.
12. Deringil, S. (2003). “They live in a state of nomadism and savagery”: The late Ottoman Empire and the post-colonial debate. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 45(2), 311–342. https://doi.org/10.1017/S001041750300015X
13. Frank, A. G. (1966). Capitalism and underdevelopment in Latin America. Monthly Review Press.
14. Freeman, C., & Louçã, F. (2003). The emergence of a new techno-economic paradigm: The age of Information and Communication Technology (ICT). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/0199251053.003.0009
15. Freifeld, M. (1986). Technological change and the ‘self-acting’ mule: A study of skill and the sexual division of labour. Social History, 11(3), 319–343. https://doi.org/10.1080/03071028608567661
16. Gatrell, V. A. C., & Gatrell, V. (1994). The hanging tree: execution and the English people, 1770-1868. OUP Oxford. Gerschenkron, A. (1962). Economic backwardness in historical perspective. Harvard University Press.
17. Grant, J. (1999). Rethinking the Ottoman “decline”: Military technology diffusion in the Ottoman Empire, fifteenth to eighteenth centuries. Journal of World History, 10(1), 179–201.
18. Hobsbawm, E. J. (1952). The machine breakers. Past & Present, (No. 1), 57–70.
19. Hobsbawm, E. J. (1968). Karl Marx's contribution to historiography. Diogenes, 16(64), 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/039219216801606403
20. Horn, J. (2005). Machine-breaking in England and France during the Age of Revolution. Labour/Le Travail, 55, 145–169.
21. Karpat, K. H. (1972). The transformation of the Ottoman State, 1789-1908. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 3(3), 243–281. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020743800025010
22. Kasaba, R. (1988). The Ottoman Empire and the world economy: The nineteenth century. SUNY (State University of New York) Press.
23. Kay, C. (2010). Latin American theories of development and underdevelopment. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203835418
24. Keyder, Ç. (1981). Proto-industrialisation and the periphery: A Marxist perspective. Insurgnt Sociologist, 10(3) 51–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/089692058101000305
25. Kocka, J. (1984). Theories and quantification in history. Social Science History, 8(2), 169-178. Küçükkalay, A. M., & Elibol, N. (2006). Ottoman imports in the eighteenth century: Smyrna (1771–72). Middle Eastern Studies, 42(5), 723–740. https://doi.org/10.1080/00263200600827842
26. Landes, D. S. (2003). The unbound Prometheus: Technological change and industrial development in Western Europe from 1750 to the present (2nd Ed.). Cambridge University Press.
27. Larsson, G. (2016). Muslims and the new media: Historical and contemporary debates. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315597102
28. Lazonick, W. (1979). Industrial relations and technical change: The case of the self-acting mule. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 3(3), 231–262. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.cje.a035423
29. Levy, A. (1982). Military reform and the problem of centralization in the Ottoman Empire in the eighteenth century. Middle Eastern Studies, 18(3), 227–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/00263208208700508
30. MacKenzie, D. (1984). Marx and the Machine. Technology and Culture, 25(3), 473–502.
31. McCraw, T. K. (2007). Prophet of innovation: Joseph Schumpeter and creative destruction. Harvard University Press. Miller, R. W. (2004). Against the Machine: The Hidden Luddite Tradition in Literature, Art and Individual Lives. Electronic Green Journal, 1(20).
32. Mokyr, J. (1992). The lever of riches: Technological creativity and economic progress. Oxford University Press. Navickas, K. (2011). Luddism, incendiarism and the defence of rural 'task-scapes' in 1812. Northern History, 48(1), 59-73. https://doi.org/10.1179/174587011X12928631621276
33. Owen, R. (1981). The Middle East in the world economy. Methuen.
34. Pamuk, Ş. (2000). The Ottoman Empire in the eighteenth century. Itinerario, 24(3-4), 104–116. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0165115300014522
35. Pamuk, Ş. (2004). Institutional change and the longevity of the Ottoman Empire, 1500–1800. Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 35(2), 225–247. https://doi.org/10.1162/0022195041742427
36. Pamuk, Ş. (2018). Uneven centuries: Economic development of Turkey since 1820. Princeton University Press. Polanyi, K. (2001). The great transformation: The political and economic origins of our time (2nd. Ed.). Beacon Press.
37. Prebisch, R. (2016). Towards a dynamic development policy for Latin America. In A. N. Agarwala & S. P. Singh (Eds.), The Economics of Underdevelopment (pp. 3–24). Oxford University Press.
38. Quataert, D. (1977). Limited revolution: The impact of the Anatolian railway on Turkish transportation and the provisioning of Istanbul, 1890–1908. Business History Review, 51(2), 139–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/3113477
39. Quataert, D. (1993). Ottoman manufacturing in the age of the industrial revolution (Vol. 30). Cambridge University Press.
40. Quataert, D. (1997). Clothing laws, state, and society in the Ottoman Empire, 1720–1829. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 29(3), 403–425. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020743800064837
41. Schumpeter, J. A. (1976). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203202050
42. Oya, S. (1969). Türkiye’de işçi sınıfı doğuşu ve yapısı. Habora Kitabevi Yayınları.
43. Thompson, E. P. (1963). The making of the English working class. Victor Gollancz Ltd. https://doi.org/10.2307/2592569
44. Tilly, C. (1983). Speaking your mind without elections, surveys, or social movements. Public Opinion Quarter, 47(4), 461–478. Tilly, C. (2013). The contentious French. Harvard University Press.
45. Toprak, Z. (1992). Modernization and commercialization in the Tanzimat period: 1838-1875. New Perspectives on Turkey, 7, 57-70. https://doi.org/10.15184/S0896634600000492
46. Wallerstein, I. (1974). The modern world-system I: Capitalist agriculture and the origins of the European world-economy in the sixteenth century. Academic Press.
47. Wishnitzer, A. (2019). Reading clocks, alla turca: Time and society in the late Ottoman Empire. University of Chicago Press.
48. Wyatt, L. T., III. (2008). The industrial revolution. Bloomsbury Publishing USA.
49. Yıldırım, K. (2013). Osmanlı'da işçiler: 1870-1922 çalışma hayatı, örgütler, grevler. İletişim Yayınları.
50. Arşiv Belgeleri
51. BOA (Cumhurbaşkanlığı Devlet Arşivleri Başkanlığı Osmanlı Arşivi), BEO (Bâb-ı Âlî Evrak Odası), 2208/210530, (22 Safer 1324 / 17 Nisan 1906).
52. BOA (Cumhurbaşkanlığı Devlet Arşivleri Başkanlığı Osmanlı Arşivi), BEO (Bâb-ı Âlî Evrak Odası), 2813/210937, (1 Rebiyülevvel 1324 / 25 Nisan 1906).
53. BOA (Cumhurbaşkanlığı Devlet Arşivleri Başkanlığı Osmanlı Arşivi), DH.EUM.KADL (Dahiliye Nezâreti Emniyet-i Umûmiye Müdüriyeti Kısm-ı Adlî Kalemi), 8/23, (19 Safer 1329 / 19 Şubat 1911).
54. BOA (Cumhurbaşkanlığı Devlet Arşivleri Başkanlığı Osmanlı Arşivi), ZB (Zabtiye Nezâreti), 325/16, (30 Temmuz 1324 / 12 Ağustos 1908).
55. BOA (Cumhurbaşkanlığı Devlet Arşivleri Başkanlığı Osmanlı Arşivi), ZB (Zabtiye Nezâreti), 325/53, (7 Ağustos 1324 / 20 Ağustos 1908).
56. "Reji Amelesi". (1910, 4 Aralık). Azad, 3, s. 2.