How did Adam Smith’s view of historical development differ from Karl Marx’s?

While both Adam Smith and Karl Marx identified a succession of historical stages driven by changes in the material basis of production, their explanations for how and why society evolves differ fundamentally.12

In the Marxian view, known as historical materialism, the engine of history is the struggle between contending socioeconomic classes. Marx argued that as the "mode of production" evolves, it creates contradictions—such as the emergence of a new class—that eventually lead to the destruction of the existing social order and its replacement by a new system.12

Conversely, Smith’s philosophical history posits that the primary moving agency is human nature. Smith believed that individuals are driven by a desire for self-betterment and guided by the faculties of reason. For Smith, the evolution of society through stages—from hunters to commercial interdependence—is a process impelled by these individual motivations, provided that progress is not obstructed by poor government policies, resource deficiencies, or war.2