题目Tell briefly what is "Enclosure Movement" in Britain(60~100words).
要求60~100words,don't exceed the limit.
圈地运动
百科名片
在14、15世纪，在农奴制解体过程中，英国新兴的资产阶级和新贵族通过暴力把农民从土地上赶走，强占农民份地及公有地，剥夺农民的土地使用权和所有权，限制或取消原有的共同耕地权和畜牧权，把强占的土地圈占起来，变成私有的大牧场、大农场。这就是英国历史上的“圈地运动”。
欧洲圈地运动
中世纪圈地运动
  中世纪的欧洲，在西起英格兰，东至乌拉尔山,南迄比利牛斯山脉和阿尔卑斯山脉,北至丹麦和瑞典南部的广大平原上，大体都盛行敞地制。敞地制起源于农村公社的土地形式。每年收割后，
庄园主和教堂的条田、农民的份地都按惯例撤除各自设置的篱笆、栅栏等物，敞开作为公共牧场。敞地以外的公有地名为庄园主所有，实属农民共有。田地的分散给农民的耕种和管理带来诸多不便。因此，在12世纪中叶，英国就有人将分散在各片大田的条形地通过交换而合并起来。这种趋势在盛行敞地制的各国都是共同的，只有先后之别。13世纪，英国庄园主根据《默顿法令》，圈占公有地以至份地。在14、15世纪农奴制解体过程中，圈地现象愈演愈烈。
15世纪末至17世纪末的英国圈地运动
圈地运动英国圈地运动(2张)
  15世纪末叶、16世纪初叶，欧洲直通印度新航线的开通和美洲大陆的发现，以及环球航行的成功，使英国的对外贸易迅速增长，进一步刺激了英国羊毛出口业和毛织业的发展。羊毛价格不断上涨。养羊业成为获利丰厚的事业。往往10英亩牧场的收益超过20英亩的耕地。英国圈地运动最早从工商业较发达的东南部农村开始。地主贵族最初圈占公有地，后来圈占小佃农的租地和公簿持有农的份地。在宗教改革中，国王把没收的教会领地赐给亲信宠臣，或卖给乡绅、土地投机家、市民、商人和工场主。他们变成新贵族，也大规模地圈占农民土地。
根据1630年和1631年的调查报告，莱斯特郡在两年内圈地10万英亩，约占 该郡土地 2%。大部圈占地变成牧场。主要的圈占者是乡绅。1485～1550年他们在莱斯特郡圈地的面积占圈地总面积的60%。大批农民被迫出卖土地,或远走他乡,或到处流浪，陷于极端悲惨的境地。t.莫尔在《乌托邦》(1516)中，辛辣地指责这是“羊吃人”。
18世纪初期至19世纪中期的圈地运动
  英国资产阶级取得决定性胜利之后，城市工业进一步发展，城市人口急剧增加。因此，对农产品的需求日益增加。地主贵族为了生产肉类和商品粮以供应城市的需要，扩大投资，改善土地的生产能力，同时加速进行圈地。资产阶级则大力鼓励圈地。政府通过议会立法使圈地合法化。地主贵族依靠国家机器，强迫农民服从圈地法案。农民无力负担圈地费用，或因失去公有地使用权而无法维持生产和生活，被迫出卖土地。随着1701年条播机的发明，开始了农业生产技术的革命。于是生产关系的革命就在更加广泛的基础上深入开展。18和19世纪，英国议会通过4763件有关圈地的法案，共批准圈占 269万公顷共耕地和公有地。1845年以后，圈地运动已近尾声。1876年公布的禁止非法圈地的法案虽只应用于公有地，但圈地作为一种运动也已结束。
  欧洲大陆的圈地运动主要发生在18、19世纪。德意志、法国、俄国和丹麦的圈地运动主要是通过政府法令实行的。捷克和波兰在1918年以后也出现过圈地运动。
The enclosure movement was the cause of one of the greatest changes in the landscape of rural England. It was the process whereby the system of communal exploitation and regulation of the arable land, open pastures, meadows and wastes (uncultivated land) was gradually replaced by a system of private land management. It involved both a legal change and a physical change.
This wonderful old poem, author unknown, is employed by Duke University Professor of Law, James Boyle to introduce his cogent analysis of The Second Enclosure Movement and the Construction of the Public Domain. Boyle’s focus is on intellectual property rights and the “intangible commons”, but his powerful piece discusses some overlapping or analogous concerns regarding the physical commons. This passionate ballad serves brilliantly as prologue because it rails against the inequities of one of the great privatization schemes in Western history a€“ the English enclosure movement.
Enclosure, summarized ever so briefly, describes the process through which farmland shared in common for communal grazing and agriculture or marginal land such as fens and moors were fenced off for private use, typically pasturage for wool production. The enclosure movement dramatically altered the English way of life, ushering in enormous economic and social upheavals that had a profound influence on modern society. Proponents and opponents of enclosure may argue vehemently about whether the changes wrought by enclosure were, in the long run, positive or negative. One’s position on this matter will offer clear insight into where he or she falls on the privatization of public lands today.
We cannot go back in time to manage the English enclosure movement more efficiently or humanely. We can and should, however, recognize that the forces at play, the arguments used to defend taking from the weak to give to the strong, are at work right this very minute. One of the implications of the enclosure movement discussed in the Wikipedia was the shift in belief regarding the importance of “common wealth” (usually implying common livelihoods) as opposed to the “public good” (the wealth of the nation or the GDP). If you’re
not sure what that means, consider how hollow pronouncements of the strength of the U.S. economy ring when real wages for most workers are dropping. Think about how outsourcing labor abroad produces such wealth for shareholders but such misery for people trying to get decent jobs. The fact that enclosure or a modern equivalent thereof may produce a net economic gain must be reconciled with the understanding that this gain accrues to far fewer people. In other words, the greater agricultural efficiencies introduced by enclosure may have benefited England and most certainly benefited the landowners, but that was little solace to the peons suddenly deprived of access to the base necessities of survival.
In the modern enclosure movement, we’re all peons.
In the early 1700s, there was an "enclosure movement" that was a cause of the industrial revolution in England. The enclosure movement was this: wealthy farmers bought land from small farmers, then benefited from economies of scale in farming huge tracts of land.
The enclosure movement led to improved crop production, such as the rotation of crops. P
eople began moving to cities, where they could more easily work in factories than on farmland. In England, population growth caused former farmers or children of farmers to migrate from southeastern England to the northwest, where factories were being built.
In History:
Enclosure Movement - 18th century movement among wealthy British landed aristocrats to rationalize their farms. Using new farming technology and systems of crop rotation, they forced the agrarian poor off the old "village commons" that now became "enclosed" as private property. The jobless poor ended up constituting the proletariat working class in the upcoming Industrial Revolution.