[maceo]

I neither wrote not implied that Europeans are evil -- you assumed that. The fact is that colonialism and the slave trade, despite creating massive amounts of wealth for some, were horrific for its subjects. And Western Europeans were the first to scale both colonialism and the slave trade globally. This isn't debatable, it's plain fact.

Unfortunately, people like the interviewee explain away early western economic domination by referring to Western European intellect and culture, and ignoring the dark side. This has been the case since the beginning of economic history. Adam Smith didn't even bother to discuss slavery in The Wealth of Nations even though he knew how critical it was to the development of capitalism.

It's time to be honest about how we got here. If the ugly truth offends you, I don't know what to tell you.

[briholt]

> The short answer is that the Europeans...were greedier than the Chinese. It's likely that the Chinese empire reached the New World before Columbus...But the thought of enslaving an entire population and stealing all their natural resources didn't even occur to the Chinese explorers.

...

> I neither wrote not implied that Europeans are evil

[maceo]

I explained very clearly why the circumstances surrounding the expeditions pushed the Europeans to be more greedy than their Chinese counterparts. The fact is that the Europeans pillaged the New World and the Chinese didn't. I believe mainly economic considerations led this to be the case. I don't know what your explanation is.

[woodandsteel]

Your phrase "the short answer" seems to imply that this is the whole explanation for why the industrial revolution happened in the West and not China. Perhaps that is not what you meant.

[woodandsteel]

It's quite true that the Europeans colonialists were tremendously cruel and greedy, and extracted enormous wealth. The question, which is what the link addressed, is why they didn't just spend this wealth, but, unlike all other civilizations, produced the industrial revolution.