Economic Success And Failure Between Waterloo And The Second World War

China depleted the consumption of their resources, while Great Britain benefitted off the amount of coal they were able to mine and utilize, and the reduced fees and accessible trade they were able to secure from their colonies. Pomeranz also argues that although economic factors had similar principles, environmental strains were similar, and “the most advanced parts of China in many ways resembled parts of the European mainland” (Pomeranz 2002, 420) . China still experienced inactivity while Great Britain experienced remarkable progress. According to Pomeranz, this had to do with the “constraints of finite land” (Pomeranz 2002, 444) and Great Britain’s capability to manage this more effectively. According to Pomeranz’s view, this divergence was provoked by the Industrial Revolution, and set China on a route to labor concentrated routines, while Great Britain spearheaded towards the cultivation of technological innovation.

However the biggest advantage Britain had that spurred their modern thinking into industrial factories was its geography. England had fast flowing rivers that were effective to power water mills for machinery, and provided transportation routes for industrial goods. The weak point about rivers was that in winter they froze, stopping the water powered machinery and blocking routes (Little, n.d.). This leads to the true geographical advantage of Britain, one that wasn’t stop by the effects of seasons: high deposits of coal and iron ore. Coal was able to power the newly invented steam engine, which was a breakthrough leading to large scale industries (Little, n.d.).

Foreign trade is one of the most important aspects of Asian and European Empires. Without trade, these empires would not have flourished in the manner that they did. Many different factors played a role in developing trade in their cultures. As various empires ruled from 2000 BC to 1911 in Asia and Europe, trade has had a major influence in the development of those cultures as seen today. The nation that has the most success in trading becomes the strongest nation and will last the longest.

Documents 4, 5, 8, and 10 all showcase why the change in economy helped the west rise. Document 4 is a graph representing different technological inventions created during the rise of the west. These creations, such as the crossbow, gunpowder, and paper, had positive outcomes. These innovations helped increase the trade throughout Europe as the demand for them drastically increased. This demand in trade from all over the world greatly increased the western economy, empowering the nations in the west. In document 5, the point of view of William McNeill, the author, is that the east ultimately benefited as a direct result of the borrowing from the west. He believes that since the west was so successful and powerful, that the only reason the east caught up with it was because they borrowed from the west. He also believes that borrowing was the only way to come to power and boost the economy. In document 8, there is evidence that the east was once the leaders in dominance and economics, but lost that standing during the rise of the west. But, there is the argument that the rise was not for the west, as it was for the world economy. Document 10 argues that there was an intentional driven European growth, and a similar growth happened in East Asia. Although this growth didn’t happen until the 1800’s, there is still the resemblance between the two. This growth in Europe helped shape its

Great Britain and Japan both have limited resources because of their geographic location. Their industry growth is affected by their location and they were forced to adapt to it. Since they are both island nations, ports and good access to the ocean and trade are necessary. Even though they are small countries they have strong navies and are also commercially strong.

Within the NO portion the author states several things to support that imperialistic rule by Britain was not primarily economic. Industrial Europe required a highly specialized world, in which some areas would produce food for its industrial proletariat, others would produce raw materials for the industrial process, and the entire world would constitute a market for industrial goods. But to achieve this Europe needed to recast the world in its own image, to create the same infrastructures and similar institutions that would permit resources to be exploited and trade conducted (MacKenzie 99). This shows that imperialistic rule by Britain and other European nations was not solely economic but more so a way to gain materials, trade materials, and expand their cultures and receive outside cultural influence through imperialistic rule rather than using imperialistic

The Portuguese have a very high advantage with Japan in the trade. When the Portuguese trade with China, they have all the Chinese good that they need. Then, they go to Japan and trade the Chinese goods for Japanese silver. This makes the Portuguese highly rich in silver. The Portuguese then trades with China again, which lets China gain some Japanese silver, while the Portuguese saves some more, because they are receiving more and more of the Japanese silver because of the trade of Chinese goods. This takes advantage of China’s economy, but also makes it grow because little to no silver is being used for the people. (Doc. 4) England is another good example for having an advantage in the trade. England’s main imports were the goods of the Chinese, and the English people would sell the goods to other cities, colonies, or countries that did not have those imports from the East Indies. This gives England more money for trade between the countries that are not near the East Indies or countries that don’t want to trade with China. England then sends a little of the silver to China. If England quit this trade, their economy would drop faster than rain. Because of this trade, their economy and social groups are high, and it keeps China’s status high too, because the silver that is being traded is not going back to the countries that are trading with them. (Doc.

Furthermore, this experience led to the discovery that the key to success is control over regions that produced valuable goods, since control over trade routes ultimately leads to their change.1 China with its warfare and seafaring technology never claimed to take control over the sea even after Zheng He’s voyages, since they had enough, if not more resources than everyone else, unlike Europe. The conclusive thought is that Europeans were poor, and in order for them to succeed in an otherwise rich world, force was the only option. The bias is therefore in the fact that Europeans had no

This had a huge effect of their wealth in their countries because only you could sell your items to other countries. Furthermore, new markets were another reason that the Europeans wish to imperialize. New markets were important because they were required in order to sustain

Implementation of the theory of comparative advantage led to a contraction of certain manufacturing industries in America and led trade to take place instead. With the rise of globalization,

Although Chandler demonstrates the distinct pathways that each of the four countries embarked on through numerous examples of large industrial firms, he concludes by comparing one or more countries against their counterparts. In the article, more precisely, Chandler states that America and Germany built their presence in Britain, while the domestic nation missed opportunities to take advantage of the Second Revolution, while Japan mimicked America and Europe’s strategies, but used them more efficiently and effectively. The issue with this argument is that despite that many of the firms that grew as a result of managerial capitalism are still industry leaders holding large market shares, and as well, the four countries have maintained their levels of power, their stories remain overpowered by the rapid development of nations such as Canada, China, and Russia, who in a similar way achieved the same rise of economies of scale as did the original four. That raises the question of whether

Impacted by nationalism and counsel from military officers, European governments sloped up military spending, buying new weaponry and expanding the extent of armed forces and naval forces. Because of their late Industrial Revolution, German innovation was significantly more progressed than those of the British, French and Russians. In view of their area and absence of a warm-water port, Russians had the most noticeably bad innovation, and hence, the most exceedingly awful military.In Europe, colonialism happened at the stature of industrialization. As European nations were finding more about the sciences and large scale manufacturing advantages through industrialization, an interest and rivalry for more land and deliver was creating, and this

Europeans brought many new technologies to the countries that they imperialized. They built railroads and other types of

The country can maximize their wealth by putting the resources in the most competitive industries. Government created comparative advantage rather than free trade because now easier moves the production processes and the machines into countries that can produce more goods (Yeager & Tuereck, 1984). However, many countries now move to new trade theory suggests the ability firms to limit the number of competitors associated with economic scale (reduction of costs with a large scale of output) (Krugman, 1992). The comparative advantage occurs when two-way trade in identical products, it will useful where economic scale is important, but it will create problem with this model. As a result, government must intervene in international trade for protection to domestic firms (Krugman, 1990)

The outbreak of the First World War in August 1914 produced immediate changes. It is often said that war is the 'locomotive of history' - that is what drives it along. Certainly the First World War helped to produce major changes in Great Britain especially socially and economically.