|
|
|
|
|
by eternalban
1215 days ago
|
|
Strong disagree with this. Merely increasing population doesn't mandate colonialist response. [It could have ended in internal revolts of hungry dispossesed mouths.] There was a socio-economic pathway open to these new people not available to their forefathers: participation in the capitalist economy and possibility for upward social mobility. It was capitalism and accompanying political restructuring (from feudalism) that released and focused that demographic, intellectual, and technical 'potential'. Would a tiny "aristocratic" minority be able to scale up empire without making emerging (secular, technical including finance) social classes partners in the fruits of empire? (Convince yourself: Consider demographic and socio-economic trends in China 1990 to 2010. Was it population growth or the socio-political change that catapulted its economic power?) |
|