Editing Capitalism (section)

=== Modernity ===
[[File:McKinley Prosperity.jpg|thumb|upright|The [[gold standard]] formed the financial basis of the international economy from 1870 to 1914.]]

Broader processes of [[globalization]] carried capitalism across the world. By the beginning of the nineteenth century, a series of loosely connected market systems had come together as a relatively integrated global system, in turn intensifying processes of economic and other globalization.<ref name="SAGE Publications">{{cite book |year=2007 |last1=James |first1=Paul |author-link=Paul James (academic) |last2=Gills |first2=Barry |title=Globalization and Economy, Vol. 1: Global Markets and Capitalism |url=https://www.academia.edu/4199690 |publisher=[[SAGE Publications]] |location=London |page=xxxiii}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |title=Impact of Global Capitalism on the Environment of Developing Economies |url=http://s-space.snu.ac.kr/bitstream/10371/93716/1/04_Osariyekemwen%20Igiebor.pdf |journal=Impact of Global Capitalism on the Environment of Developing Economies: The Case of Nigeria |pages=84 |access-date=31 July 2020 |archive-date=20 March 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200320071239/http://s-space.snu.ac.kr/bitstream/10371/93716/1/04_Osariyekemwen%20Igiebor.pdf |url-status=live}}</ref> Late in the 20th century, capitalism overcame a challenge by [[Planned economy|centrally-planned economies]] and is now the encompassing system worldwide,<ref name="britannica">{{cite book |title=Capitalism |publisher=Encyclopædia Britannica |url=https://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/93927/capitalism |date=10 November 2014 |access-date=24 March 2015 |archive-date=29 June 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110629021539/https://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/93927/capitalism |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=James |first=Fulcher |title=Capitalism, A Very Short Introduction |quote=In one respect there can, however, be little doubt that capitalism has gone global and that is in the elimination of alternative systems |pages=99 |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |date=2004 |isbn=978-0-19-280218-7}}</ref> with the [[mixed economy]] as its dominant form in the industrialized Western world.

[[Industrialization]] allowed cheap production of household items using [[economies of scale]], while rapid [[population growth]] created sustained demand for commodities. The [[imperialism]] of the 18th-century decisively shaped globalization.<ref name="SAGE Publications" /><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Thomas |first1=Martin |last2=Thompson |first2=Andrew |date=1 January 2014 |title=Empire and Globalisation: from 'High Imperialism' to Decolonisation |journal=The International History Review |volume=36 |issue=1 |pages=142–170 |doi=10.1080/07075332.2013.828643 |s2cid=153987517 |issn=0707-5332|doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |title=Globalization and Empire |url=https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/47230635.pdf |journal=Globalization and Empire |access-date=31 July 2020 |archive-date=23 September 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200923063531/https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/47230635.pdf |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |title=Europe and the causes of globalization |url=https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/7045619.pdf |journal=Europe and the Causes of Globalization, 1790 to 2000 |access-date=31 July 2020 |archive-date=7 December 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171207091124/https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/7045619.pdf |url-status=live}}</ref>

After the [[First Opium War|First]] and [[Second Opium War]]s (1839–60) by [[United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland|Britain]] and [[France]] and the completion of the [[British people|British]] conquest of India by 1858 and the [[French people|French]] conquest of [[Africa]], [[Polynesia]] and [[Indochina]] by 1887, vast populations of Asia became consumers of European exports. Europeans colonized areas of Africa and the Pacific islands. Colonisation by Europeans, notably of Africa by the British and French, yielded valuable natural resources such as [[rubber]], [[diamonds]] and [[coal]] and helped fuel trade and investment between the European imperial powers, their colonies and the United States:

{{blockquote|The inhabitant of London could order by telephone, sipping his morning tea, the various products of the whole earth, and reasonably expect their early delivery upon his doorstep. Militarism and imperialism of racial and cultural rivalries were little more than the amusements of his daily newspaper. What an extraordinary episode in the economic progress of man was that age which came to an end in August 1914.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/shared/minitext/tr_show01.html |title=Commanding Heights: Episode One: The Battle of Ideas |publisher=[[PBS]] |date=24 October 1929 |access-date=31 July 2010 |archive-date=30 March 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100330093746/http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/shared/minitext/tr_show01.html |url-status=live}}</ref>}}

From the 1870s to the early 1920s, the global financial system was mainly tied to the [[gold standard]].<ref>{{cite book|last=Eichengreen|first=Barry|author-link=Barry Eichengreen|date=6 August 2019|title=Globalizing Capital: A History of the International Monetary System|edition=3rd|publisher=[[Princeton University Press]]|doi=10.2307/j.ctvd58rxg|isbn=978-0-691-19458-5|s2cid=240840930 |lccn=2019018286}}{{page needed|date=December 2023}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last1=Eichengreen|first1=Barry|author-link=Barry Eichengreen|last2=Esteves|first2=Rui Pedro|date=2021|editor1-last=Fukao|editor1-first=Kyoji|editor2-last=Broadberry|editor2-first=Stephen|editor2-link=Stephen Broadberry|section=International Finance|title=The Cambridge Economic History of the Modern World|publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]]|volume=2: ''1870 to the Present''|pages=501–525|isbn=978-1-107-15948-8}}</ref> The United Kingdom first formally adopted this standard in 1821. Soon to follow were [[United Province of Canada|Canada]] in 1853, [[History of Newfoundland and Labrador|Newfoundland]] in 1865, the United States and Germany (''[[de jure]]'') in 1873. New technologies, such as the [[telegraph]], the [[transatlantic telegraph cable|transatlantic cable]], the [[radiotelephone]], the [[steamship]] and [[railway]]s allowed goods and information to move around the world to an unprecedented degree.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nber.org/papers/w7195 |last1=Bordo |first1=Michael D. |author1-link=Michael D. Bordo |last2=Eichengreen |first2=Barry |author2-link=Barry Eichengreen |last3=Irwin |first3=Douglas A. |title=Is Globalization Today Really Different than Globalization a Hundred Years Ago? |series=NBER |number=Working Paper No. 7195 |date=June 1999|doi=10.3386/w7195 }}</ref>

In the United States, the term "capitalist" primarily referred to powerful businessmen<ref>{{Cite book |last=Andrews |first=Thomas G. |title=Killing for Coal: America's Deadliest Labor War |publisher=[[Harvard University Press]] |year=2008 |isbn=978-0-674-03101-2 |location=Cambridge |page=64 |author-link=Thomas G. Andrews (historian)}}</ref> until the 1920s due to widespread societal skepticism and criticism of capitalism and its most ardent supporters.

[[File:NY stock exchange traders floor LC-U9-10548-6.jpg|thumb|left|The New York [[stock exchange]] [[trading room|traders' floor]] (1963)]]

Contemporary capitalist societies developed in the West from 1950 to the present and this type of system continues throughout the world—relevant examples started in the [[United States in the 1950s|United States after the 1950s]], [[Trente Glorieuses|France after the 1960s]], [[Spanish miracle|Spain after the 1970s]], [[Economy of Poland|Poland after 2015]], and others. At this stage most capitalist markets are considered{{by whom|date=July 2021}} developed and characterized by developed private and public markets for equity and debt, a high [[standard of living]] (as characterized by the [[World Bank]] and the [[International Monetary Fund|IMF]]), large institutional investors and a well-funded [[banking system]]. A significant [[managerial class]] has emerged{{when|date=July 2021}} and decides on a significant proportion of investments and other decisions. A different future than that envisioned by Marx has started to emerge—explored and described by [[Anthony Crosland]] in the United Kingdom in his 1956 book ''[[The Future of Socialism]]''<ref>{{cite book |last=Crosland |first=Anthony |title=The Future of Socialism |publisher=Jonathan Cape |year=1956 |location=United Kingdom}}{{page needed|date=December 2023}}</ref> and by [[John Kenneth Galbraith]] in North America in his 1958 book ''[[The Affluent Society]]'',<ref>{{cite book |last=Galbraith |first=John Kenneth |title=The Affluent Society |publisher=[[Houghton Mifflin]] |year=1958 |location=United States}}{{page needed|date=December 2023}}</ref> 90 years after Marx's research on the state of capitalism in 1867.<ref>{{cite book |last=Shiller |first=Robert |title=Finance and The Good Society |publisher=[[Princeton University Press]] |year=2012 |location=United States}}{{page needed|date=December 2023}}</ref>

The [[Post–World War II economic expansion|postwar boom]] ended in the late 1960s and early 1970s and the economic situation grew worse with the rise of [[stagflation]].<ref>{{cite book |last=Barnes |first=Trevor J. |title=Reading economic geography |publisher=[[Blackwell Publishing]] |isbn=978-0-631-23554-5 |page=127 |year=2004}}</ref> [[Monetarism]], a modification of [[Keynesian economics|Keynesianism]] that is more compatible with ''laissez-faire'' analyses, gained increasing prominence in the capitalist world, especially under the years in office of [[Ronald Reagan]] in the United States (1981–1989) and of [[Margaret Thatcher]] in the United Kingdom (1979–1990). Public and political interest began shifting away from the so-called [[Collectivism and individualism|collectivist]] concerns of Keynes's managed capitalism to a focus on individual [[choice]], called "remarketized capitalism".<ref name="Fulcher, James 2004">{{cite book |last=Fulcher |first=James |title=Capitalism |edition=1st |location=New York |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |date=2004}}{{page needed|date=December 2023}}</ref>

The end of the [[Cold War]] and the [[dissolution of the Soviet Union]] allowed for capitalism to become a truly global system in a way not seen since before [[World War I]]. The development of the [[neoliberal]] global economy would have been impossible without the fall of [[communism]].<ref>{{cite book |last=Gerstle |first=Gary |author-link=Gary Gerstle |date=2022 |title=The Rise and Fall of the Neoliberal Order: America and the World in the Free Market Era |url=https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-neoliberal-order-9780197519646?cc=us&lang=en& |location= |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |pages=10–12, 149 |isbn=978-0-19-751964-6|quote=The collapse of communism, then, opened the entire world to capitalist penetration, shrank the imaginative and ideological space in which opposition to capitalist thought and practices might incubate, and impelled those who remained leftists to redefine their radicalism in alternative terms, which turned out to be those that capitalist systems could more, rather than less, easily manage. This was the moment when neoliberalism in the United States went from being a political movement to a political order.}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Bartel |first=Fritz |date=2022 |title=The Triumph of Broken Promises: The End of the Cold War and the Rise of Neoliberalism |url=https://www.hup.harvard.edu/books/9780674976788 |location= |publisher=[[Harvard University Press]] |pages=5–6, 19 |isbn=978-0-674-97678-8}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Greene|first1=Julie|authorlink1= Julie Greene|date=April 2020|title=Bookends to a Gentler Capitalism: Complicating the Notion of First and Second Gilded Ages|url=|journal=[[The Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era]] |volume=19 |issue=2 |publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]]|pages=197–205|doi=10.1017/S1537781419000628|pmc= |pmid= |access-date= |name-list-style=vanc}}</ref>

Harvard Kennedy School economist Dani Rodrik distinguishes between three historical variants of capitalism:<ref>{{citation |last=Rodrik |first=Dani |title=Capitalism 3.0 |date=2009 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt46mtqx.23 |work=Aftershocks |volume= |pages=185–193 |editor-last=Hemerijck |editor-first=Anton |publisher=[[Amsterdam University Press]] |jstor=j.ctt46mtqx.23 |isbn=978-90-8964-192-2 |access-date=14 January 2021 |editor2-last=Knapen |editor2-first=Ben |editor3-last=van Doorne |editor3-first=Ellen}}</ref>
* Capitalism 1.0 during the 19th century entailed largely unregulated markets with a minimal role for the state (aside from national defense, and protecting property rights);
* Capitalism 2.0 during the post-World War II years entailed Keynesianism, a substantial role for the state in regulating markets, and strong welfare states;
* Capitalism 2.1 entailed a combination of unregulated markets, globalization, and various national obligations by states.

==== Relationship to democracy ====
The relationship between [[democracy]] and capitalism is a contentious area in theory and in popular political movements.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Milner |first1=Helen V |title=Is Global Capitalism Compatible with Democracy? Inequality, Insecurity, and Interdependence |journal=[[International Studies Quarterly]] |date=2021 |volume=65 |issue=4 |pages=1097–1110 |doi=10.1093/isq/sqab056 |doi-access=free}}</ref> The extension of adult-male [[suffrage]] in 19th-century Britain occurred along with the development of industrial capitalism and [[representative democracy]] became widespread at the same time as capitalism, leading capitalists to posit a causal or mutual relationship between them. However, according to some authors in the 20th-century, capitalism also accompanied a variety of political formations quite distinct from liberal democracies, including [[fascism|fascist]] regimes, [[Absolute monarchy|absolute monarchies]] and [[One-party state|single-party states]].<ref name="Burnham" /> [[Democratic peace theory]] asserts that democracies seldom fight other democracies, but others suggest this may be because of political similarity or stability, rather than because they are "democratic" or "capitalist". Critics argue that though economic growth under capitalism has led to democracy, it may not do so in the future as [[authoritarian]] régimes have been able to manage economic growth using some of capitalism's competitive principles<ref>{{cite magazine |first=Gady |last=Epstein |title=The Winners And Losers in Chinese Capitalism |url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/gadyepstein/2010/08/31/the-winners-and-losers-in-chinese-capitalism/ |magazine=[[Forbes]] |access-date=28 October 2015 |archive-date=5 November 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151105210914/http://www.forbes.com/sites/gadyepstein/2010/08/31/the-winners-and-losers-in-chinese-capitalism/ |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=The rise of state capitalism |url=http://www.economist.com/node/21543160 |newspaper=[[The Economist]] |access-date=24 October 2015 |issn=0013-0613 |archive-date=15 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200615124603/https://www.economist.com/leaders/2012/01/21/the-rise-of-state-capitalism |url-status=live}}</ref> without making concessions to greater [[political freedom]].<ref>{{cite web |last=Mesquita |first=Bruce Bueno de |url=http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20050901faessay84507/bruce-bueno-de-mesquita-george-w-downs/development-and-democracy.html |title=Development and Democracy |date=September 2005 |access-date=26 February 2008 |work=[[Foreign Affairs]] |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080220154505/http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20050901faessay84507/bruce-bueno-de-mesquita-george-w-downs/development-and-democracy.html |archive-date=20 February 2008}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Siegle |first1=Joseph |last2=Weinstein |first2=Michael |last3=Halperin |first3=Morton |date=1 September 2004 |title=Why Democracies Excel |url=http://www.mafhoum.com/press7/212S28.pdf |journal=[[Foreign Affairs]] |volume=83 |issue=5 |pages=57 |doi=10.2307/20034067 |jstor=20034067 |access-date=26 August 2018 |archive-date=12 April 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190412055541/http://www.mafhoum.com/press7/212S28.pdf |url-status=live}}</ref>

Political scientists [[Torben Iversen]] and [[David Soskice]] see democracy and capitalism as mutually supportive.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Iversen |first1=Torben |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv4g1r3n |title=Democracy and Prosperity: Reinventing Capitalism through a Turbulent Century |last2=Soskice |first2=David |date=2019 |publisher=[[Princeton University Press]] |jstor=j.ctv4g1r3n |isbn=978-0-691-18273-5}}</ref> [[Robert Dahl]] argued in ''On Democracy'' that capitalism was beneficial for democracy because economic growth and a large middle class were good for democracy.<ref name=":0a">{{cite book |last=Dahl |first=Robert A. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZG4JEAAAQBAJ |title=On Democracy |date=2020 |publisher=[[Yale University Press]] |isbn=978-0-300-25799-1 |language=en}}</ref> He also argued that a market economy provided a substitute for government control of the economy, which reduces the risks of tyranny and authoritarianism.<ref name=":0a" />

In his book ''[[The Road to Serfdom]]'' (1944), [[Friedrich Hayek]] (1899–1992) asserted that the free-market understanding of [[economic freedom]] as present in capitalism is a requisite of [[political freedom]]. He argued that the market mechanism is the only way of deciding what to produce and how to distribute the items without using coercion. [[Milton Friedman]] and [[Ronald Reagan]] also promoted this view.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Pryor |first1=Frederic L. |title=Capitalism and freedom? |journal=Economic Systems |date=2010 |volume=34 |issue=1 |pages=91–104 |doi=10.1016/j.ecosys.2009.09.003}}</ref> Friedman claimed that centralized economic operations are always accompanied by [[political repression]]. In his view, transactions in a market economy are voluntary and the wide diversity that voluntary activity permits is a fundamental threat to repressive [[political leader]]s and greatly diminishes their power to coerce. Some of Friedman's views were shared by [[John Maynard Keynes]], who believed that capitalism was vital for freedom to survive and thrive.<ref>{{cite journal |first=Friedrich |last=Hayek |author-link=Friedrich Hayek |title=The Road to Serfdom |journal=[[Nature (journal)|Nature]] |volume=154 |issue=3911 |pages=473–474 |publisher=[[University of Chicago Press]] |year=1944 |isbn=978-0-226-32061-8 |bibcode=1944Natur.154..473C |doi=10.1038/154473a0 |s2cid=4071358}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Bellamy |first=Richard |title=The Cambridge History of Twentieth-Century Political Thought |publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] |year=2003 |isbn=978-0-521-56354-3 |page=60}}</ref> [[Freedom House]], an American [[think-tank]] that conducts international research on, and advocates for, democracy, political freedom and [[human rights]], has argued that "there is a high and statistically significant correlation between the level of political freedom [[Freedom in the World|as measured by Freedom House]] and economic freedom [[Index of Economic Freedom|as measured by the Wall Street Journal/Heritage Foundation survey]]".<ref>{{cite book |first=Adrian |last=Karatnycky |title=Freedom in the World: The Annual Survey of Political Rights and Civil Liberties |publisher=[[Transaction Publishers]] |date=2001 |isbn=978-0-7658-0101-2 |page=11}}</ref>

In ''[[Capital in the Twenty-First Century]]'' (2013), [[Thomas Piketty]] of the [[Paris School of Economics]] asserted that inequality is the inevitable consequence of economic growth in a capitalist economy and the resulting [[Wealth concentration|concentration of wealth]] can destabilize democratic societies and undermine the ideals of social justice upon which they are built.<ref>{{cite book |author-link=Thomas Piketty |last=Piketty |first=Thomas |date=2014 |title=Capital in the Twenty-First Century |publisher=[[Belknap Press]] |isbn=978-0-674-43000-6 |page=571}}</ref>

States with capitalistic economic systems have thrived under political regimes deemed to be authoritarian or oppressive. [[Singapore]] has a successful open market economy as a result of its competitive, business-friendly climate and robust rule of law. Nonetheless, it often comes under fire for its style of government which, though democratic and consistently one of the least corrupt,<ref>{{cite web |title=Transparency International Corruption Measure 2015 |url=https://www.transparency.org/country/#SGP |website=Transparency International Corruption Measure 2015 – By Country / Territory |publisher=Transparency International |access-date=20 September 2016 |archive-date=31 March 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160331114640/http://www.transparency.org/country/#SGP |url-status=dead}}</ref> operates largely under a one-party rule. Furthermore, it does not vigorously defend freedom of expression as evidenced by its government-regulated [[Censorship in Singapore|press]], and its penchant for upholding laws protecting ethnic and religious harmony, judicial dignity and personal reputation. The private (capitalist) sector in the People's Republic of China has grown exponentially and thrived since its inception, despite having an authoritarian government. [[Augusto Pinochet]]'s [[Military dictatorship of Chile (1973–1990)|rule in Chile]] led to economic growth and high levels of inequality<ref>[[Naomi Klein|Klein, Naomi]] (2008). ''[[The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism]].'' [[Picador (imprint)|Picador]]. {{ISBN|0-312-42799-9}} [https://books.google.com/books?id=PwHUAq5LPOQC&pg=PA105 p. 105] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150319071518/http://books.google.com/books?id=PwHUAq5LPOQC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA105 |date=19 March 2015 }}.</ref> by using authoritarian means to create a safe environment for investment and capitalism. Similarly, [[Suharto]]'s authoritarian reign and [[Indonesian mass killings of 1965–66|extirpation]] of the [[Communist Party of Indonesia]] allowed for the expansion of capitalism in [[Indonesia]].<ref>{{cite journal |last=Farid |first=Hilmar |date=2005 |title=Indonesia's original sin: mass killings and capitalist expansion, 1965–66 |journal=[[Inter-Asia Cultural Studies]] |volume=6 |issue=1 |pages=3–16 |doi=10.1080/1462394042000326879 |s2cid= 145130614}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Robinson |first=Geoffrey B. |date=2018 |title=The Killing Season: A History of the Indonesian Massacres, 1965–66 |url=https://press.princeton.edu/titles/11135.html |publisher=[[Princeton University Press]] |page=177 |isbn=978-1-4008-8886-3 |access-date=1 August 2018 |archive-date=19 April 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190419011656/https://press.princeton.edu/titles/11135.html |url-status=live}}</ref>

The term "capitalism" in its modern sense is often attributed to [[Karl Marx]].<ref name="Scott">{{cite book |title=Industrialism: A Dictionary of Sociology |last=Scott |first=John |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |year=2005}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title="capitalism, n.2". OED Online |url=http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/27454?rskey=ZVI1hr&result=2&isAdvanced=false |access-date=19 January 2013 |archive-date=23 September 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200923063611/https://www.oed.com/start;jsessionid=A9CBE07460C68ED291D7D6CDCE84A1B1?authRejection=true&url=%2Fview%2FEntry%2F27454%3Frskey%3DZVI1hr%26result%3D2%26isAdvanced%3Dfalse |url-status=live}}</ref> In ''[[Das Kapital]]'', Marx analyzed the "[[Capitalist mode of production (Marxist theory)|capitalist mode of production]]" using a method of critique that later became known as [[Marxism]]. However, while Marx did discuss capitalism extensively, he used the term "capitalism" less frequently than "capitalist mode of production." His collaborator, [[Friedrich Engels]], played a significant role in popularizing the term in more political interpretations of their work. In the 20th century, supporters of the capitalist system often replaced the term "capitalism" with phrases such as "free enterprise" or "private enterprise" to avoid its negative connotations. Similarly, the term "capitalist" was sometimes substituted with "[[investor]]" or "[[Entrepreneurship|entrepreneur]]" to emphasize productive roles rather than passive wealth accumulation.<ref name="Williams 1983 51">{{cite book |last=Williams |first=Raymond |title=Keywords: A vocabulary of culture and society, revised edition |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |year=1983 |isbn=978-0-19-520469-8 |page=[https://archive.org/details/keywordsvocabula00willrich/page/51 51] |chapter=Capitalism |chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/keywordsvocabula00willrich/page/51}}</ref>