History

23895 readers

30 users here now

Welcome to c/history! History is written by the posters.

c/history is a comm for discussion about history so feel free to talk and post about articles, books, videos, events or historical figures you find interesting

Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember...we're all comrades here.

Do not post reactionary or imperialist takes (criticism is fine, but don't pull nonsense from whatever chud author is out there).

When sharing historical facts, remember to provide credible souces or citations.

Historical Disinformation will be removed

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

WhoaSlowDownMaurice@hexbear.net

thelastaxolotl@hexbear.net

RiotDoll@hexbear.net

Why did Colonialism happen? (hexbear.net)

submitted 2 weeks ago by Redbolshevik2@hexbear.net to c/history@hexbear.net

21 comments fedilink hide all child comments

China and India were the most important places on Earth for almost all of history. The "Near East," the "Far East," Africa, and the Americas all had advanced empires at times, and most outstripped Europe technologically for most of history. The Ottomans famously made use of gunpowder before Europeans, but the Chinese were (of course) the first to weaponize it.

So what enabled Europeans to so successfully dominate the world? Obviously it wasn't their exceptional genetics or superior "culture," or even, I think, the massive experience in organized murder from Europeans all killing each other. Was it Capitalism? Industrialization? Agriculture? Did the massive trade network encompassing half the globe create a population with a huge array of immune disease carriers?

Notably, the "Scramble for Africa" happened much later than the settling of the Americas. Did the wealth sucked out of the Americas allow the Europeans to do something that would've been previously impossible (or at least not worth the effort)?

I know this is kind of a massive question to answer and I'm sure it's very contested, but I'd appreciate any responses and any book recommendations.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] BeanisBrain@hexbear.net 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The Origins of the Modern World talks about how, come the 19th century, the steam engine was more or less the big advantage Europe had over other powers. The basic mechanism was known for a while, but it was so inefficient that its only practical application was for use in coal mines where it had an effectively infinite fuel supply sitting right there. This led to refinements to the design that improved the efficiency enough to make it practical for other purposes, in particular steamships, which had speed and maneuverability no sail ship could match. With that advantage, Europe could more or less go anywhere and take anything it wanted (as long as it had reasonable sea/river access).

[–] Redbolshevik2@hexbear.net 8 points 2 weeks ago

I've read The Origins of the Modern World and liked it a lot. The concept of fossil fuels as fixed solar energy that allows one to (temporarily) not be limited by the cycle of solar energy circulation really stuck with me. My allusions to China and India are heavily informed by that book.