Commercial ICE.docx - Unit 3 Commercial ICE Lecture one...

This preview shows page 1 - 3 out of 34 pages.

Unit 3 – Commercial ICELecture one – March 08 2018Title “Great Divergence”Why did European economies “take off” (economic prosperity) in the 18thand 19thcenturies?thequestion on the tableoEuropeans becoming more engaged with the rest of the world and eventually asserting control over many places and trade networks. oGo back to early modern period. Europeans beginning to lay groundwork for global colonialism. oRecent historians say to bring the date up to 1750,not earlier as is usually assumed. Preciously assumed that European dominance comes from the fact they were able to make it around Africa. NOT TRUE. oEarly decades of 1800 European economies clearly growing much more rapidly than Asian economies. oBeginning of period of stagflation relative to north America and Europe. Similarities to 1800oEurope was incredibly weak until much later than we originally thought. Other places much more powerful than them. china particularly very underestimated/powerfuloA lot of restrictions on Europe. oChina in early 18thhundred was just as much or just as little an open society as Britain was. Much of the closeness was influential for Europeans. Circuits of trade, 1200’s GDP in dollars 1900. Older explanations for divergence have focused on mentality. Cultural difference on fundamental levels between Europe and Asia. older culture/ mentality explanations. European willingness to engage with world vs Chinese isolation. In recent times this doesn’t hold waterImpending ecological crisis (reaching limits on land, fibers, and fuel/energy)Kenneth Pomeranz argues that both Europe and china were facing ecological crisis. Land access was stressed in supporting populations because population increasing rapidly. The great Divergence; china,Europe, and the making of the modern world economy. oBoth places assessed this problem. Taking similar routes to solve in 1700s. managing population strategies to ensure survival. oLooking for availiable land, and fuel and energy to sustain population.oHis ideology is based off HOW this crisis was handled. Europe could break through these limits (mostly by luck) whereas china was unable to break the limits. A series of decisions on both sideslead to lucky outcomes for Europe and unlucky for china. Although both faced the constraints similarly. Divergence partly from choices, mostly unearned opportunities in dealing with the crisis.Both western Europe and china employees trade. Europe’s system of trading was more successful than china’s. Europeans developed highly organized, militarized (aggressive), state supported trading companies. China wasn’t particularly good in reaching out. They focused on land based trade and around themselves. Europeans Came to THEM. But they hit the limits that can be overcome by ocean going
trade. Confined to land will confine your trade. Trade system being land based had limits. They promoted trade Into their land and let Europeans trade at THEIR ports.

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture