Gregory Clark can explain that to you.
But, as an aside, Clark's account of the Industrial Revolution is not the most important aspect......
Wade's account of the backwardness of Africa and elsewhere leaves much to be desired.
It wasn't because African negroes were slaves. They weren't.
The slaves were sold by African negroes to white or Muslim traders and taken elsewhere.
My own view is that their own extreme negro diversity itself caused their ages long backwardness. See David Reich.
What other explanation with so wide a genomic soft sweep could there be?
After all, most all bitchin peasants throughout the world, of any goddamn color, were in the same Malthusian trap, more or less, as African negroes.
If you trot out the argument that Nordic pops faced more environmental adversity than other Europeans, or any others, to explain their dominance over the long prehistoric and historic time, I can trot out African negroes, not slaves of white people, who undoubtedly faced equally daunting though non Ice Age adversity in the Dark Continent, for eons, but didn't do a goddamn thing that was advanced.
If you paid them off, wealth equalized them, Pikettied them, in order to make them global econozens, it would not work out very well, as Wade has pointed out re aid to Africa for over 50 years.
Radical endogamies, at the other extreme, in India, seem to have lead to similar backwardnesses, ironically enough. See Reich.
No comments:
Post a Comment