Expansion in the Industrial Age - Obstacles to Industrialization

EXPANSION IN THE INDUSTRIAL AGE HIST 1301 | History Obstacles to Industrialization There is much historical disagreement on the Great Divergence, which is the time when many parts of Africa, Latin America, and Asia (save for Japan) did not grow economically, technologically, or militarily, whereas Western Europe and subsequently North America did. Due to this disparity, non-Western countries were significantly disadvantaged, which shaped current global dynamics and inequities. Historians have put up a number of ideas, each emphasising a distinct aspect that led to the divergent developmental paths, to explain why this difference arose. The abundance of natural resources in various places is one well-known explanation. Large coal supplies were available across Europe, especially in Britain, and these sources were essential for igniting the Industrial Revolution in its early phases. In addition to providing energy for manufacturing and machinery, coal promoted progress in transportation and metallurgy. Conversely, there were not as many easily accessible coal resources in many places of Asia, Latin America, or Africa. These areas' inability to industrialise at the same rate or scale as Europe is sometimes attributed to this imbalance in natural resources. It was hard for these countries to grow the heavy industries that defined early industrialization without a comparable energy supply. The impact of colonialism and the international economic system it established was another important aspect. In the Americas, Africa, and Asia, European countries such as Britain, France, and eventually the United States, acquired vast colonies. Rich resources from these colonies, including agricultural goods, precious metals, and other raw commodities, were essential to the expansion of the European economy. The wealth derived from these colonies encouraged more economic development and innovation across Europe. Furthermore, the colonies functioned as captive markets for manufactured products produced in Europe, guaranteeing a consistent demand and promoting economies of scale. On the other hand, substantial disparities were established and maintained by this colonial system. Colonised areas were frequently assimilated into the world economy in a way that favoured the colonial powers at the expense of regional industrial growth. The economies of Africa, Asia, and Latin America were not designed to be autonomous hubs of industrial production, but rather to function as suppliers of raw materials and consumers of European commodities. Another important factor contributing to the Great Divergence was military technology and the ensuing power disparities. Industrialization led to significant technical breakthroughs that provided European countries a significant military edge over their non-industrialized counterparts. Examples of these advancements include improved guns, steam-powered ships, and later railroads. This gave them the power to impose unfair treaties and use force to establish their economic domination. For instance, the mid-19th century Opium Wars between Britain and China resulted in treaties that severely restricted China's sovereignty and greatly favoured British commercial interests. Similar trends were observed in Latin America and Africa, where favourable commercial conditions and political influence were obtained via the employment of European and American military might, further entrenching economic imbalances. Some historians contend that internal forces inside African, Asian, and Latin American cultures significantly contributed to their diverse courses, in contrast to these external causes. For example, Egypt and other countries in Latin America decided on purpose to concentrate on exporting raw resources instead of developing industrialization. Their historical, geographic, and climatic circumstances, which favoured agricultural output and resource exploitation, had an impact on this method. Agricultural exports were profitable in these areas because to the abundance of labour and temperatures that are ideal for commodities like cotton, sugar, and coffee. In addition, landowning elites with a stake in preserving the agrarian economy rather than funding industrial expansion were frequently given preference by the social and political systems in these cultures. Centuries of history, including pre-colonial trade routes and societal structures, moulded these internal dynamics and impacted the economic policies these countries followed in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Different areas' economic routes were also impacted by the makeup of their labour forces. Labour was organised to support large-scale agricultural rather than industrial activities in many African and Latin American countries. While they supplied the labour for plantations and mines, systems of slavery, indentured servitude, and peonage did not promote the growth of a trained industrial workforce. Japan and the European countries, on the other hand, created wage labour systems that were more suited to industrialization. While in many colonised territories the labour force remained bound to conventional or colonial agricultural methods, social and economic shifts freed up labour for factories, facilitating the shift from rural to industrial economies across Europe. Economic opportunities were also shaped by climate and geographic variables. Because of their unique climatic conditions, tropical areas have had trouble establishing several industries. For example, diseases like yellow fever and malaria presented serious public health issues that hindered economic growth. On the other hand, Europe's moderate climate was more suited for long-term industrial development. Furthermore, certain regions' physical isolation prevented them from accessing international trade networks and technical advancements that fueled Europe's industrialization. Japan's late 19th-century industrialization is a prime illustration of how non-Western nations may overcome these obstacles given the right circumstances. The Meiji Restoration, a time of profound political, social, and economic change, gave Japan the ability to successfully absorb and modify Western industrial techniques and technology. A centralised administration that put modernization first and made investments in infrastructure, education, and military might made this possible. The success of Japan calls into question deterministic theories that rely only on resources or location, emphasising the significance of institutional frameworks and policy decisions. In summary, a variety of intricately interacting elements led to the Great Divergence, such as the distribution of natural resources, colonial exploitation, disparities in military might, internal economic plans, labour force structure, and environmental and climatic circumstances. The distinct historical and social background of every location shaped its course of development. African, Latin American, and Asian countries' economic destiny were greatly influenced by internal decisions and circumstances, even while external influences such as resource endowments and colonialism were equally important. Comprehending this complex historical process helps us understand the persistent worldwide disparities and emphasises how important it is to take a wide variety of variables into account when analysing economic progress.