In assessing the impact of the British Industrial Revolution on the working class, "optimist" historians have traditionally relied on real-wage indexes for adult male laborers to argue that living standards rose steadily between 1790 and 1850. "Pessimist" historians, however, contend that such macroeconomic metrics present a distorted picture of working-class welfare. They argue that the optimists' singular focus on male wages obscures the concurrent collapse of the domestic system, which drastically reduced female and child employment and often depressed overall household incomes. Moreover, pessimists emphasize that real-wage indexes fail to capture the profound degradation of the urban environment that accompanied industrialization. The increased morbidity resulting from rapid, unregulated urbanization—exemplified by the devastating cholera epidemics of the 1830s—exacted a severe toll on the working class. Consequently, pessimists argue that even if purchasing power marginally increased, the unquantifiable physical costs of the industrial urban environment meant that the overall quality of life for workers undeniably deteriorated.
Which of the following best describes the primary function of the author's reference to the "cholera epidemics of the 1830s"?
- Ademonstrate that the unquantifiable physical costs of the industrial environment ultimately outweighed the benefits of increased purchasing power
- Blink the severe degradation of the urban environment directly to the concurrent collapse of female and child employment in the domestic system
- provide a specific instance of a broader phenomenon used by pessimist historians to challenge the adequacy of the optimists' primary evidenceAnswer
- Dillustrate a severe consequence of industrialization that optimist historians acknowledge must be weighed against rising real-wage indexes
- Edocument the exact historical causes of the increased morbidity that characterized rapid, unregulated urbanization during the period