cross-posted from: https://lemmit.online/post/5962668
This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.
The original was posted on /r/todayilearned by /u/kalni on 2025-05-31 20:36:01+00:00.
cross-posted from: https://lemmit.online/post/5962668
This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.
The original was posted on /r/todayilearned by /u/kalni on 2025-05-31 20:36:01+00:00.
What happened, India?
The Great Divergence. China was also up there alongside India for many centuries. Europe was a backwater.
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/2000-years-economic-history-one-chart/
https://lemmy.today/pictrs/image/e89435dd-fa66-4eaa-bc9a-fb97c5053d77.jpeg
Note that the time axis on the chart above is not linear.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Divergence
Excellent info and good reads, thank you.
Industrialization was a massive game changer for humanity, especially for the cultures that adopted it early.
For better or for worse will be the big question, especially since it’s a major driver of climate change which may result in our extinction. In any event the world has been set on this path by the West so we will have to see how it plays out.
Someone would’ve figured it out sooner or later, just happened to be Europe in our timeline
Perhaps, we often assume these transformations to be inevitable in hindsight, we as humans are biased to see things that way.
200 years from now will be interesting. I think that’s a good enough time away to really understand what we’re going thru now, and have faced the consequences.
The hight of civilization, or the hubris?
Sure. I’ll add one guess that I’ve had for a long time as to one substantial factor in what helped start things get going in Europe relative to East Asia: moveable type. That drastically brought down the cost of written works, which acted as an enabler for subsequent social and technological changes, and happened towards the beginning of that “early divergence” period.
Why didn’t it take off in East Asia?
East Asia had had block printing, even moveable type, for a long time before Europe. However, it did not use alphabetic systems of writing, and if you have thousands of logograms, the kind of practical “I have a small number of bins of identical characters” thing doesn’t work nearly as well.
https://ca.pbslearningmedia.org/resource/moveable-type-story-of-china/moveable-type-story-of-china/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movable_type
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_printing_in_East_Asia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printing_press#Gutenberg.27s_press
https://www.taiwan-panorama.com/Articles/Details?Guid=09433229-1971-44c8-a7fe-0193be415fbc&langId=3&CatId=11
So that would have been a technological window running from in the 1400s to something like the 1970s where it was cheaper to do production of written works in (alphabet-based) European languages than in (logogram-based) major East Asian languages.
EDIT: On another interesting note, the Soviets tried to promote an alphabet-based writing system for Chinese some time back.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanization_of_Chinese
What about the Indian subcontinent? Aren’t their alphabets also easily adaptable to moveable type?
Sure, it’s not only Europe that used a alphabetic writing system; wouldn’t have been purely determined by the writing system. Someone was going to be first, though. But I think that anyone using a logographic system with a huge number of logograms faced a substantial barrier with moveable type—they either had to recreate their system of writing or come up with a different system of inexpensive dissemination of information. East Asia had that barrier in front of it.
Absolutely, i believe you’re correct. Excellent writeup!
Another factor would be higher population and the ability of that population to have time to think and work on ideas other than survival. Which i think, and could be wrong about but it seems right, would have started around the European Renaissance and really boomed during the industrial revolution. At least for western civilizations.
why should i believe any of this is important compared to the manifest looting of the americas
Huh, I thought China was always the bigger power. Interesting. But wasn’t the Japanese economy at some point literally almost as big as the US one? That’s not really true on the graph?
To me the chart makes little sense in that these nations do not exist nearly for that long so dividing these geographic spots by today‘s borders is arbitrary at best and deliberate framing at worst.
Colonization.
Outside Invasion and colonisation.