Ricardo Duchesne wrote: > All this talk about whether trade was a necessary or a sufficient > condition is meaningless unless we make a distinction between > slave profits, the colonial trade, and total foreign trade. My > conclusion, given the findings and arguments I have forwarded so far, > is that *slave profits* played an insignificant role. Not only were such > profits *not* a sufficient cause; they were not necessary either: > Europe would have industrialized anyways. > > Now, the *colonial trade* played a statistically moderate, not too > significant, role. Europe would also have industrialized without it - > although at a lower rate, and at a later date. > > Total foreign trade was significant but was not the major cause. You haven't mentioned what exactly the colonial trade consisted in. England brought in raw materials necessary for manufacturing from the colonies. It was thus able to decrease its dependence on the the continent for raw materials. Raw materials may have been, on the whole, statically small but was a very important factor in "take off" and industrialization. here's some more of Michael Hudson's analysis (which I think will support Jim B too): "Europe was catapulted out of its medieval epoch. The massive influx of silver and gold after 1492 inflated its prices, greatly accelerated the monetisation of its economic life and transformed its land tenure systems. These processes in turn catalyzed enclosure movements, a rural exodus and urbanization... Meanwhile, colonialism and foreign trade laid the foundation for a vast credit expansion, of which governments were the first beneficiaries. A fund of capital developed which was invested domestically and abroad the epoch's great public trading and investment companies led by the East and West Indies Companies of Holland, Britain and France. The growth of commerce, the argicultural-urban revolution and the associated monetary revolution were associated with wars, national debts, the growth of private sector banking and credit, inflation and taxes. This was the essence of the Reformation in its economic aspect.(p17) "Secure supplies of raw materials were critical to achieving industrial advantage. Many such materials could not be economically produced ar home for they required tropical climates or mineral rich ores. The acquisition of the colonies having these resources therefore spurred an international rivalry among the European nations. A wise management of foreign trade would draw gold into the domestic monetary system while colonization would become a major means of supporting this trade.(p25) "Only a political theory can explain how England rose from a comparatively less developed country to one surpassing Holland and France by endowing itself with much of their skilled labor, Iberian gold and other international economic resources. England certainly did not start out with a particularly high ratio of capital relative to its labor force. (p30) "...India at the outset ot its contact with Europe had a far superior accumulation of labor skills and tools, gold and other capital. It outstripped all European countries in textile production, the major industry of the 16th and 17th centuries... Colonial lands and resources were burdened with quasi-feudal institutions of land tenure that impede their subsequent agricultural and social development, most conspicuously in Latin America. IN this manner Europe's mother countries established the specialization patterns that have steered world commerce for many centuries, persisting even after the colonies won their nominal political freedom (p31)" Trade, Development and Foreign Debt Vol.1. Sam Pawlett
