the great divergence debate

Question 1

What were the classic opposed visions about the rise of Europe?

Answer 1

Europe as a beacon of progress

Europe as a ruthless thief

Question 2

What is common to these opposed visions?

Answer 2

Both of them are about the cultural uniqueness / European exceptionalism (similar types of narratives)

Question 3

Who argued that Europe was a beacon of progress?

Answer 3

Max Weber

Question 4

Other Arguments about Great Divergence

Answer 4

Environmental factors, political factors (why nations fail)

Question 5

When were key differences seen? (2)

Answer 5

Renaissance

1750s - 1800s (Pomeranz)

Question 6

Who thought key diff.’s were seen in the renaissance

Answer 6

Jones

Question 7

Why is the pre1700 is debunked?

Answer 7

Economic change happens after

How do we even measure? (comparison units)

Question 8

Which group thinks GD happened around 1800?

Answer 8

Revisionist view / california school

Question 9

What’s the main argument of the California School?

Answer 9

Non EU powers were leaders until 1500 - EU only cathed up in 1800
Critique of Eurocentrism
Based on centrality of China in EM period

Question 10

Differences within the California School?

Answer 10

Pomeranz “Eurasian similarity thesis”

Gunder Frank “European backwardness thesis”

Question 11

What’s Pomeranz’s main argument?

Answer 11

Europe’s internal growth was important but Asians had that too until 1800
GD was only shaped by privileged access to overseas resources & exploitation

Question 12

Integrative X comparative approach

Answer 12

Europe and asia interactions not as distinct

Question 13

Pomeranz - Core Elements

Answer 13

a. Integrative Approach
Because China remonitized its currency to silver- that’s why Spanish became rich (everything isn’t internal to Europe)
b. Comparison of regions not states

Question 14

What does Pomeranz think about “Europe had more human and physical capital”?

Answer 14

China and japan had similar birthrates and living standards

Question 15

What does Pomeranz think about “European institutions allocate resources more productively”?

Answer 15

Industrial capitalism 1800s and it was just Britain until 1860 - this argument doesn’t matter

Question 16

What does Pomeranz think the game-changer is for Europe?

Answer 16

Projection of imperial rivalries overseas

Question 17

What is a “new system of complementarity”?

Answer 17

In Maritime empires, their peripheries are left behind.
Because of slavery and plantation systems, these areas only produce large amounts of cheap, raw materials.
Because of this their economy isn’t diverse and they need to import everything else.
On the other hand, Chinese peripheries experience a proto-industrial boom.
Because of this boom, laborers switch to profitable handicrafts. (specialization)
In other words, there’s less complementarity btw core & periphery in Asia.
As a result, in China there’s too much manufactured goods & less raw materials.
The core doesn’t just export manufactured goods, and get raw materials from the periphery.
You run out of both people and land to produce the raw materials because standards of living rise.

Question 18

What does Pomeranz think about the importance of coal?

Answer 18

Ghost acreage ( coal replaces what we previously needed land for - now we have more land)
Ghost labor (replacing human labor)
However, overseas exploitation is also important (we can’t rely on internal developments)

Question 19

What are the contemporary consequences of the complementarity system?

Answer 19

Self perpetuating division of labor (primary product exporters vs. manufacturing regions)