Kenneth Pomeranz Ö 7 DownloadTing book Particularly for fans of Bomb: The Race to Build--and Steal--the World's Most Dangerous Weapon (Newbery Honor Book) history whoave Oh Susannah had a largely European perspective The great divergence summed up would be as follows there is this theory on why China was different from Europe and that is why Europe become the economic powerhouse and not china then Kenneth Pomeranz steps in and in a dozen or so pages filled with tons of data and comparative analysis or case studies points outow much assumption and The Founders of Psychical Research how little fact based research is in this specific theory and up we go to the next theory It is as if the author was sick and tired of the many stereotypical assumptions on China and Japan when compared to western Europe thate decided to list all the things Pelé: The King of Soccer heeard and systematically disproved them so Chakras & Self-Care: Activate the Healing Power of Chakras with Everyday Rituals he could easily counter the said assumptions in debates ah but your theory is flawed for Iave actually studied the data and they tell me you are wrong I get why The Unforgiven he chose this approach and style foris book but I did not like it in short if your not already deep in the subject the book will feel as a blur afterwards with a few general impressions in stead of a few solid arguments Well except for the final statement spoiler rather than pretend we are seeking the differences among truly independent entities on the eve of industrialization we must acknowledge the importance of pre ex Europe and the West by extension gets their balls clipped in this magisterial mostly economic Omgiven av idioter history comparing and integrating the opposite ends of Eurasia Ken argues that by 1750 Europe meaning Britain and East Asia China and Japan were basically at the same stage of economic development type and suffering from the same ecological constraints It was only the accident of geography and juxtaposition that allowed parts of western Europe to exploit the New World and surge forth A lot of thatas to do with the bloodthirsty nature of European expansion but Kenny doesn t go into that too much This is very much an economic Kapitulatus! history and a look atow things are the same than different in a global perspective Pomeranz argues in a book which The Ivory Gate has become uite influential of late Martin Jacues for example relies on Pomeranz revisionististory that the great divergence of China and the West only occurs about 1800 that before that time China was if anything ahead and that the divergence came as a result of fortuitous and purely material circumstances viz as the world exhausted its supplies of energy wood England ad ready access to large deposits of coal that lay near its industrial eartland while China Ci alleniamo anche se piove?: Miserie e splendori del calcio dilettantistico had coal but it was in the north and northwest and at a distance from the industrial areas and because Europe alsoad a sudden access to large uantities of natural resources in the New WorldOf course this begs the uestion as to why it was Europe and not China that engaged in a period of Discovery that Europe as Mokyr Star Wars Thrawn Star Wars Thrawn has argued was already ahead in early forms of industrialization well before 1800 during the 16th and 17th centuries why it was Europe that built and then USED guns eg and not China whichad invented gunpowder etc etcWhile there are many factors there can be little uestion that Europe brought something cultural to the table The Spirit of Protestantism of course was Weber s answer But there is something to be added to this namely to use JH Parry s brilliant phrase an extreme readiness to apply science in immediately practical ways Age of Reconnaissance p 15The Chinese New York Is English, Chattanooga Is Creek. (Richard Jackson Books (Atheneum Hardcover)) had technology gunpowder and theyad theory science but like the Greeks of the Hellenistic period who only used their knowledge of steam power to power toys at the court of the Ptolemies they largely failed to combine the two which is precisely what was accomplished to a degree previously undreamt of in the Europe of the 15th 18th centuryWhat Europe Guiding Readers and Writers, Grades 3-6: Teaching Comprehension, Genre, and Content Literacy had of course that was uniue was a fully developed and formalizable theory of induction whichad been developed by logicians in Oxford at the time of Robert Grosseteste see eg AC Crombie Robert Grosseteste and the Origins of Experimental Science 1100 1700 also which itself was developed directly out of the concept of analysis which Descartes describes in the Regula as the method of discovery as opposed to Synthesis which is the method of exposition which was in turn derived from early Greek mathematical writers the notion is already in Aristotle who passed it on to the Greek commentary tradition the so called Aristotelian Commentators of the CAG and thence to the Arabs from whom it passed via Averroes to the West under the Latin name of regressus This concept of analysis by which one passes from the confused whole presented in sensation to the elements that compose it and then via synthesis back to the whole this concept of analysis The Stray Bullet however as Francis Bacon and only a few othersave seen was derived directly from the Socratic dialectic which itself is inconceivable without the Autobiography of Mark Twain, Vol. 3 highly articulated and inflected nature of the ancient Greek language Thus the seeds of the Great Divergence lay far in advance of British coal minesI read this book about a year no maybe two years ago and was not impressed Of course this is not my field and it was the first book Iad read on the topic of the great divergence so the following needs to be taken with large eapings of saltFirst of all the writing was turgid and repetitive it ad all of the vices and none of the graces of good academic writing But than that though that is a lot I recall feeling that the book underweighted the advantages that Europe Bloody Crystal had in terms of a culture of rational analysis that mustave been critical to the development of industrializationI also could not believe that the mere proximity of
coal could be a distinguishing characteristic of importance since access doesn t necessitate use It is well known for examplecould be a distinguishing characteristic of importance since access doesn t necessitate use It is well known for example the Alexandrians in the Hellenistic period knew La sculpture sur pierre : Art et techniques how toarness steam power but used it only to make toy battleships for the Ptolemaic court to play with the Greeks knew all about induction and deduction Bear Humbug had a full grasp of theypothetical method as early as Plato s Meno and knew the difference between analysis and synthesis as early as Plato and Aristotle and yet STILL never developed the experimental method which Afterlife had to wait upon Roger Bacon whoimself Blue Is for Nightmares had to learn of it of course indirectly from Averroes and from the Arabic translations of the late Greek commentaries on Aristotle see eg the works of AC Crombie Indeed the Greeks didave the concept of zero ouden despite what is often said they just didn t use it in mathematics as a place Heroes Die holder which was the key innovation made by the Arabs So knowledge of a thing does not necessarily mean that a thing gets used Thereas to be some sort of intellectual catalyst as well as a material oneAnyway all this by way of preface to the claim that this article by Joel Mokyr L'Ingénu ht caseyang offers a very nice introductory critiue of Pomeranz oft cited book though I am sure that Mokyr s argument will be unwelcome to many in the Academy the merit of a book rests upon its method not upon its implications a fact generally overlooked by contemporary scholarship in many a field Very important book with ideas that were groundbreaking at the time but needlessly dense JanuaryFebruary 2015 Truly this is one of the toughest books we graduateistorians must read Pomeranz s ideas are great but the book s readability is not the best If you re a casual reader this is NOT the book for you This book is for serious students of economics The Strathmore Club history and political science and environmental science now that I think about itKenneth Pomeranz argues uite compellingly that we must stop privileging the West as innately superior to the East He specifically wants to abandon ideas that Europe especially Britain was somehow predestined to experience the Industrial Revolution and surpass Asia technologically To this ende amasses a bunch of statistical data and evaluates the state of Chinese Japanese Indian British and continental European economics in the 1700s Pomeranz shows that China and Japan in particular Pampa Pampa had relativelyigh levels of proto industrialization as well as impressive trade networks On issues like lifespan wages creature comfort the competitiveness of local markets etc China in particular often surpasses Great Britain So Pomeranz does a good job of showing that the Industrial Revolution could Frankenstein; or The Modern Prometheus haveappened anywhereWhy did the Revolution Geometry Part 1: Quickstudy Laminated Reference Guide (Quick Study Academic) happen in England and not China then For Pomeranz the key is an influx of natural resources sugar cotton timber and fossil fuels from the New World Supporting factors included thearnessing of coal and other fossil fuels in Britain new tech population growth in Britain s developed cities as opposed to Chinese population growth in the farmlands and precious metals silver from the New World that Europeans could use trade with AsiaCritiues that Herbier et autres collections have arisen for the book Pomeranz makes the industrial divergence between East and West sound sudden than it probably was Some of the data is awfully speculative and based on small datasets from China et al Some of the comparisons between Britain and provinces of China and India are pretty broad The last three chapters of the book are poorly organized compared to the extremely well organized first three chapters Near the end of the book the prose becomes extremely dense Pomeranz couldave explored the role of science and fossil fuels a most tantalizing motif Historical Archaeology: Why the Past Matters he touches upon in far greater detailBut the big takeaways Maybe we should define modernity based on whoarnessed fossil fuels first instead of "defining modernity awkward cultural claims The East often was on a par " modernity awkward cultural claims The East often was on a par ahead of the West The New World s raw resources may The Happiest Baby on the Block have mattered than actual money obtained thereMuch food for thoughtUpdate 9292016 Re read the book I bumped my rating from 3 stars to 4 A second read reveals the strength of the writing which one doesn t notice the first time because of the dense ideas Pomeranzas a debt to Max Weber in thinking that capitalism appeared around the world at an early time Unlike Weber Pomeranz doesn t think capitalism is the inevitable form of modern civilization Pomeranz draws from Thomas Malthus s idea of resource traps civilizations are bogged down just feeding themselves never mind using natural resources for industrialization Supplies from America elped Britain escape its Malthusian limits China which experienced population growth in poor rural areas ad to spend resources on feeding people this process succeeded but didn t leave much material left to use in industry Pretentious circumvoluted and unsubstantiated revisionist blabber apparently solely written for the sake of contrarian revisionism in itself There is nothing scientific ere in spite of the tepid flow of anecdotal facts all about as relevant to the main story the emergence of economic growth from the Malthusian world as deckchair moves were to the istory of the Titanic Economic The Future of English Teaching Worldwide history is done through models not from selected anecdotes Shame on an otherwise dependable publisher foraving lent credence to thi. G increased imports rather than maximizing yields Together coal and the New World allowed Europe to grow along resource intensive labor saving pathsMeanwhile Asia it a cul de sac Although the East Asian interlands boomed after 1750 both in population and in manufacturing this growth prevented these peripheral regions from exporting vital resources to the cloth producing Yangzi Delta As a result growth in the core of East Asia's economy essentially stopped and what growth did exist was forced along labor intensive resource saving paths paths Europe could Sigrid Liljeholm have been forced down tooad it not been for favorable resource stocks from underground and overseas. .
A truly excellently researched and thorough argument against European exceptionalism in the Industrial Revolution and that there was something special about Europe that made it inevitable that the IR should David Starr Space Ranger happen In Pomeranz s view the only things different about Europe and China and by thate really means Britain and the Yangzi Delta but for reasons of either selling books to speak to modern controversies or a misguided attempt to address every Eurocentric argument in the world Crusader conspiracy Banner books he uses the general categories of China and Europe were Britainad coal deposits and Europe as a whole The Book of Earths: Hollow Earth, Ancient Maps, Atlantis, and Other Theories (Forgotten Books) had access to the New World and its vast raw materials which China did not His argument is that they were both approaching an ecological cul de sac where their respective population growth and unsustainable resource use was about to screw them both and make the kind of leisure time that allowed industralization to be invented totally obsolete as both areas worked to survive but Europe got a break and basically cheated by getting trees and sugar from the New World I m exaggerating but that is the gist I foundis economic treatment compelling An English Translation of Fa Tsangs Commentary on the Awakening of Faith his dismissal of cultural differences the books greatest weakness I alsoad a problem with the fact that Gauntlet A Novel of International Intrigue he statede was setting out to do an eualized treatment of the two uestions Why is China not like Europe and why is Europe not like China and ended up mostly writing an extremely defensive piece about why China is just as good as Europe by European standards engaging a lot in particularly with Marx and Weber I know The University of Chicago Spanish English English Spanish Dictionary he is an economicistorian but be I magnifici dieci honest about what you re doing Hade said The Happiness Secrets Of Joel Osteen he was redressing an imbalance in Industrial Revolutionistory I would Seashells have been fine this read mostly likeim going overboard in trashing Europe I An Excellent conceited Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet have a whole long thing about this but I justad to write an essay on this for class so I m not writing another one Anyway it s a HUGE slog and put me to sleep every ten pages which is why it doesn t get the fifth star But it s an extremely compelling argument and I recommend it to all economists or anyone interested in the rise of China It is Ruhestand fr Einsteiger hardly news that the Westas led the world economically for the past 200 years or This superiority let s be onest that s what it is academics commonly call the Great Divergence a term coined by Samuel Huntington in 1996 though the study of Western economic superiority began much earlier There are many sub uestions one can ask eg what constitutes the West Is it England England and parts of the Continent How does America fit in When exactly did this takeoff begin Are other countries now catching up or even passing the West But these sub uestions are all small change compared to the most important uestion why did the West diverge from the rest of the world at all when all of world istory up to that time exemplified the Malthusian Trap where productivity increased too slowly to increase per capita output even when aggregate output increasedI once saw a list of roughly 200 different answers to this uestion each with academic citations Probably some of them were Captain Crazy ideas tied to theories like the Phantom Time Hypothesis look it up But most of them were at least superficially plausible Wading through this morass is not for the faint of Farmer Boy heart especially because this is one of those uestions where many people want a single answer and the answer may well be all of the above or at least many of the above But upon examination it is possible to divide works examining the Great Divergence along three axes One is academic vs popular writing Another is unitary or largely unitary theories vs theories that ascribe the difference to a multiplicity of factors And the third axis is those theories that cite cultural differences vs those that cite material or economic differences This book Kenneth Pomeranz s The Great Divergence falls suarely into the academic unitary material bucket It is a scholarly and thought provoking book not without failings but forceful in its conclusions and compelling in much of its analysisAs far as the writing itself goes this book is a blend of extreme clarity combined with unfortunate opacity It is clear in that Pomeranz precisely states every single one ofis arguments identifies opposing arguments marshals the facts and gives Random House Webster's College Dictionary: 1996 Graduation Promotion his conclusions appropriatelyedged if necessary The reader is grateful for this focus on academic excellence The opacity comes in with the phrasing which is infected with a Making Mentoring Happen A simple and effective guide to implementing a successful mentoring program heavy dose of academic speak It s not dreadful and the careful reader can understand everything But Pomeranz does not try to grab the reader s attention find compelling turns of phrase or dazzle the reader withis analogies In this Panda Bears he is the opposite of popular authors such as Jared Diamond author of Guns Germs and Steel which posits that Europeans were the lucky beneficiary of a series of ecological rolls of the dice whose book is mostly flash though that does not mean Diamond is wrong So careful reading of Pomeranz s book is a chore An interesting chore perhaps like mucking out the stables of aerd of unicorns but still a chorePomeranz begins in Turning Points in Australian History his Introduction by narrowing the scope of the discussion Every careful author on the topicas to do this or the size and scope of the topic will necessarily overwhelm What specific countries are we examining What time period are we talking about What measures are we using Pomeranz does this and Desarrollo de Habilidades Directivas he applies the same narrowing analysis to both the West and to Eurasia which isis main comparison area Thus Let Dai Vol 8 he ascribes to England the prime mover rolee focuses on the first Industrial Revolution
Beginning Around 1800 Andaround 1800 and uses mostly precisely defined but narrow economic measures which are widely available for England but less so for Eurasia a problem An Excellent conceited Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet he worksard to remedy He sometimes brings in data from other European countries as parallels eg France the Netherlands or as contrasts eg Denmark Similarly as to Eurasia Hoodwinked he focuses mostly on parts of China east and southeast and most of all the Yangzi Delta sometimes bringing in data from other Asian countries Japan and India and sometimes contrasting to other areas of China which given China s size is roughly analogous to comparing different European countries to each otherPomeranz s analytical and argumentative framework is as follows First European progress prior to 1800 was not significantly advanced beyond the most advanced portions of China Past authors thought it was but new dataas made what were previously thought uniue European achievements Look And Ordinary Second Past Authors Ignored The Other Than and ordinary Second past authors ignored the other than benefits of the New World to Europe They focused on metals but it was much than that the New World relieved ecological pressures that Europe faced primarily land constraint where an increasing population would otherwise Братья Карамазовы have been doomed to increase agricultural output through and less efficient use of labor the curse of diminishing returns and would notave ad access to necessary supplies such as timber and fiber Third England s easy access to large volumes of coal was uniue and it was this that made exponentially increasing energy production needed for takeoff possible Fourth Europe s institutions whether that means capital accumulation markets technological inventiveness state protection of property contractual rights class structures or other of the multitude of factors adduced by other authors were not in fact superior to Chinese structures in their actual impact as that relates to the Industrial Revolution they may ave been superior for HORROR STORIES human society and they mayave been somewhat superior for certain aspects of expansion but they were not determinative In short Pomeranz focuses on what was truly globally scarce land and energy and concludes that the edge Europe and particularly England Sloane Monroe SeriesBooks 4 5 had was land and energy at exactly the time they needed it This framework is the sum of the book and it is clearly laid out in the Introduction The rest of the book divided into three parts and six chapters merely adds detail and plenty of itPart One is devoted to doubting various contentions that Europead an internally generated economic edge before 1800 instead positing broad similarities among the most densely populated and commercialized parts of the Old World ie the entire world of the time Pomeranz identifies this as the main difference between Vida de perros his and the mainstream position with the latterolding that the takeoff of the Industrial Revolution was just the fully visible effect of underlying differences proceeding into the past although there is little agreement among mainstream proponents of what exactly those differences were Pomeranz goes through the various candidates for pre existing relevant differences ranging from different types of accumulated and non accumulated capital mostly non monetary life expectancy birthrates technology market characteristics which gets their own chapter and so on He addresses each and concludes it fails to demonstrate a real difference between China and Europe prior to 1800It is in Part One though that the two major faults of this book show up an eagerness bordering on desperation to tout Chinese accomplishments while minimizing European accomplishments and a failure to adeuately acknowledge a fact obvious from the text that data for China is extremely limited and therefore can only be used with extreme caution especially as a comparison to the much voluminous data available from EuropeAs to the first fault for example Pomeranz begins by admitting that Europe was advanced technologically and Oeuvres de Ennius Quirinus Visconti, Vol. 3 had a culture open to science Thene backpedals rapidly claiming that The Mobius Twist, Alien Abduction and Judgement of the Human Race heas shown that European productivity was not The Love of a King higher and therefore it is unlikely that the average level of technology Europeans deployed was superior This is deficient logic since productivity is not linearly tied to technology and anyway Pomeranzas not shown and does not show that European productivity was not Mystery: 3 Books in One: The Rockingdown Mystery / The Rilloby Fair Mystery / The Ring-O-Bells Mystery higher And notablyere and in similar sections where Pomeranz stretches to reach a conclusion Seneca Falls and the Origins of the Women's Rights Movement Pivotal Moments in American History he desires the word clearly shows up repeatedly My legal writing teacher my first year of law school was useless even if today she is the dean of a relativelyigh profile law school but she did tell us one thing that was correct anyone who uses the word clearly is trying to cover up that what Aliens Music of the Spears Aliens he says is not actually clear at allPomeranz tries to avoid the implications ofis initial admission about superior European technology by claiming that in many ways various non European societies remained ahead For this Made in Yorkshire Series Box Set ( he cites irrigation as being superior in China No doubt but irrigation was not needed in Europe both because rainfall was constant and because rice was not the main crop so it isardly surprising that Europeans did not focus on the technology of irrigation Then Untitled The Wicked Powers he starts rambling about land in the New World prefiguring one ofis main contentions but not sticking to the point at Hearts Untamed hand Thene says that India was better at and textile weavi. The Great Divergence brings new insight to one of the classic uestions of istory Why did sustained industrial growth begin in Northwest Europe despite surprising similarities between advanced areas of Europe and East Asia As Ken Pomeranz shows as recently as 1750 parallels between these two parts of the world were very Sinful Paradise The Davies Legacy high in life expectancy consumption product and factor markets and the strategies ofouseholds Perhaps most surprisingly Pomeranz demonstrates that the Chinese and Japanese cores were no worse off ecologically than Western Europe Core areas throughout the eighteenth century Old World faced comparable local shortages of land intensive prod. ,
Ng and dyeing which is true enough but irrelevant and that India is today still the leader in Blood of the City hand weaving seems relevant but is not mentionedere And then Eleven Minutes Fracture he says that various parts of Africa which produced large amounts of iron and steel that were of a uality at least as good as anything available in early modern Europe That seems unlikely unlesse means Damascus which isn t in Africa Then Blitzkrieg in the West he claims that the only reason Europead formal scientific societies was because they were often essential to protecting science from a Richard Seddon hostile established Church which is very badistory given that such societies arose long after the Make Your Own Lunch heyday of Church power and in the case of England where the most important such society was totally outside any Church power and that the Church was by far the biggest supporter of scientific progress in the Middle Ages and during the Renaissance All of this is merely flailing that never gets around to any concrete proof that various non European societies remained ahead Pomeranz wouldave been well advised simply to claim lack of certainty something Avant-Garde Graphics in Russia: Posters, Book Design, Children Books, Typography and more he does constantly with respect to China as I note below about the relative state of technology and move on It may be that those academics who claim superiority for Europe in both technology and scientific thinking are wrong But Pomeranz fails miserably to show that to be the caseAlong the same lines it seems unlikely that European monarchs imitated the Chinese ritual ofaving the emperor plow the year s first furrow I Natural Science (Gateway to the Great Books, have nevereard of such a custom but to the extent it existed in Europe it seems like a pretty obvious possible ritual for a monarch and very unlikely to Enchanted World 6 have been copied from remote China But gullibly ascribing such imitation gives a window into Pomeranz s desperation to build up China at European expense Moreover Pomeranz is fond of making sweeping generalizations on little evidence as long as they favor China such as claiming that keeping Chinese women atome kept China almost factory less even though every other factor available capital technological inventiveness and so on made it as good a candidate for industrialization as Europe Pomeranz does a decent job showing some evidence for this position but The Wisdom Network An 8 step Process for Identifying Sharing And Leveraging Individual Expertise his conclusion isardly justified and the great weight of evidence suggests that China was very much lacking in technological inventiveness but rather The Kooks Guide to Surfing had a decent amount of scattered tinkering ability which is very much not the same thing Toby Huffas written extensively on this distinction in The Chemists Companion Guide to Patent Law his The Rise of Early Modern Science Similarly Pomeranz repeatedly claims thatundreds of years before the Industrial Revolution China Northlight had spinning euipment very close to the machines that revolutionized English cotton spinning fourundred plus years later which differed in just one crucial detail which Kuantum Sıçraması he does not specify Maybe that s true but I can find no other evidence for it and if it s true it just goes to prove the lack of Chinese technological inventiveness suggesting those who allege Chinese cultural deficiencies in the application of technology are correctAs to the second major fault to take just one example on page 63 where Pomeranz is discussing Chinese iron and coal production a crucial uestion because of the importance of iron and steel to industrialization and because the efficient use of coal isighly correlated to the expansion of iron and steel production in the course of ONE PAGE Pomeranz radically ualifies statements about Chinese data in twelve different ways seem to A Rocky Existence have known it is unclear a critical study says very little about fuel leading one to suspect we still know very little this study suggests there is still much we do not know it is unclear a distinct possibility even if it turns out if it did might wellave been Such language appears continuously throughout the book almost exclusively in sections examining facts about China critical to Pomeranz s entire thesis The simple fact seems to be that we don t know nearly enough to support the claims Pomeranz makes about China to make comparisons despite Pomeranz in multiple appendixes working to construct such data in narrow areas such as Estimates of Manure Applied to North China and European Farms in the Late Eighteenth Century and a Comparison of Resulting Nitrogen Fluxes He clearly worked very ard but the result is not all that convincing Which doesn t mean e s wrong but it may well mean the data is simply not available and never will bePomeranz concludes Part One by claiming that European science technology and philosophical inclinations alone do not seem an adeuate explanation But this is assuming the conclusion because Deconstruction Omnibus he never tell us why that should be especially because by this very statemente admits the superiority of European science technology and philosophical inclinations It s just a bunch of Jeszcze dzień życia hand waving so thate can spend the rest of the book talking about coal and the New World and the real drivers of the Great Divergence Which is fine but it does suggest that the premise on which The Southern Baptist Convention A Sesuicentennial History he builds the rest of the book rests on fragile foundations at best Of course many authorsave written entire books on this topic see eg both Huff and Gregory Clark s Farewell To Alms so I suppose you can t really aggressively fault Pomeranz for not wanting to get bogged down and to instead want to turn to what Grey Noise Conversations with Yoni Rei Future Fiction Book 14 he brings to the table that s newIn Part Two Pomeranz treats as established that China and Europe did not materially economically differ around 1800 He never addresses culture differences in any substantial way as I say this is a book about the economicmaterial axis of the Great Divergence He therefore turns to why China and Europe diverged after 1800 He examines many varied theories including consumption of luxury goods firm structure state control and expropriation interstate violence and so on Along the waye rejects the common left wing trope that Asia was Beyond Reason Using Emotions as You Negotiate heading toward an industrial revolution until crushed by Western imperialism Rather the entire world waseading for a common proto industrial cul de sac in which the Malthusian Trap would maintain primacy until the uniue combination of coal and the New World allowed Europe to escapeThis is what Pomeranz outlines in Part Three He admits that technological creativity was the real driver of the Industrial Revolution but claims that coal and the New World made that creativity possible Every part of the world The Hobgoblin of Little Minds had ever increasing constraints on growth because without something new diminishing returns were kicking in Fuel fiber and food were all gettingarder to obtain ecological damage was becoming widespread as different areas struggled to feed growing populations and that damage was rapidly mortgaging the future But the New World abolished the land constraint for the West
allowing manufactured goods made without much land use to be exchanged landmanufactured made without much land use to be exchanged for land food and fiber that could not Pro Truth have been produced in the same way within the Old World And coal allowed those manufactured goods to be produced in ever greater uantities creating an expanding engine of growthPomeranz relieseavily on Denmark as a possible alternate path for Europe the exception that proves the rule Denmark ad no takeoff until the 20th Century instead relying on increasingly intensive agriculture with diminishing returns and it ad very little industry Denmark s path was in fact very similar to the path taken by China Pomeranz believes this shows that the path of ecological near self sufficiency through rural labor intensification once adopted was not easily abandoned and that this path was the alternate path that Europe as a whole might ave taken along with the rest of the world which raises the uestion whether we d all still be living in a world euivalent to 1800 otherwise Maybe But this ignores the extremely significant cultural differences between Denmark and all of Scandinavia but especially Denmark and other parts of Europe Denmark is well known for the so called Jante Law which is as Wikipedia tells us a pattern of group behavior towards individuals within Nordic countries that negatively portrays and criticizes individual success and achievement as unworthy and inappropriate It is well covered in Michael Booth s recent The Almost Nearly Perfect People and provides an extremely plausible reason for Nordic economic backwardness The crushing of excellence as shown by achievement necessarily leads to less or zero achievement Thus it s not only as between Eurasia and Europe that cultu Excellent super in depth discussion of why Europe surpassed China in the early modern period 1500 1800 even though China was technologically economically and financially advanced than Europe prior to that and as late as 1750s Overall e underestimates the effects of colonialism and imperialism and seems to overestimate the role of coal but I m not an expert on this But really good anyway The comparisons will blow you away Main complaint people usually How To Make A Noise: a Comprehensive Guide to Synthesizer Programming have is that it is too detailed and slow to read A very fun book to read Pomeranz takes a sledgehammer to older ideas of European exceptionalism and Weberian ideas of a nebulous capitalist spirit instead suggesting that until about 1800 Europe and China precisely England and the Yangzi delta were on very comparable courses Theyad a similar life expectancy levels of commercial development and comparable demand for new goods Both were approaching a population ceiling and were as a result taking a very Mockingjay heavy toll on the local ecology Pomeranz s main point is that England moved on to industrialization while the Yangzi delta did not for two reasons England s coal deposits were much nearer to their sites of economic development encouraging a switch from the increasingly scarce timber to coal and England s access to their colonies on the New World which could provide them with all the land intensive products they lacked domestically In a lot of ways it s portrayed as an accidental development a sort of geographical fluke that England became the world s first industrial power It s a really fascinating read though occasionally a bit dense I m not sure that I entirely agree with it Pomeranz s first section that underlines the pre 1750 similarity of England and the Yangzi Delta is really great at least to a non specialist on China but I m slightly skeptical that industrialization was as accidental as it was portrayedere There s a total rejection of cultural factors in differing developments I can understand this because broad unsubstantiated cultural differences Common Sense on Mutual Funds New Imperatives for the Intelligent Investor have played too large a role in scholarship of this sort in the past But I do think that culture is importantere particularly in trying to figure out why England dove The Bear and the Nightingale headfirst into technological innovation and China did not Pomeranz goes into this a bit but it s not always convincing as a complete portrait I m not sure for example why distant coal deposits should be so damning for an empire thatad such good systems of water transportation Those caveats aside though it s a really interes. Ucts shortages that were only partly resolved by tradePomeranz argues that Europe's nineteenth century divergence from the Old World owes much to the fortunate location of coal which substituted for timber This made Europe's failure to use its land intensively much less of a problem while allowing growth in energy intensive industries Another crucial difference that The Wood Wife he notesas to do with trade Fortuitous global conjunctures made the Americas a greater source of needed primary products for Europe than any Asian periphery This allowed Northwest Europe to grow dramatically in population specialize further in manufactures and remove labor from the land usin. ,