pull down to refresh

7 sats \ 4 replies \ @Yermin 16 Apr \ parent \ on: The 1776 Revolution: We Owe Our Prosperity to Two Men from Glasgow (Matt Ridley) history econ

If slavery was irrelevant, why did British industry depend so heavily on slave-grown cotton?

Are you saying CPI is flawed, or that slavery didn’t matter? Those are different claims.

If cotton was the main input for British textiles, and slaves produced the cotton, where does “irrelevant” come from?

write
compose
7 sats \ 3 replies \ @denlillaapan OP 16 Apr

It didn't... It was immaterial. Take away slavery, and British industrial revolution would have happened just as well.

And no, you're the one invoking some modern-day equivalent number. Don't do that

reply
7 sats \ 2 replies \ @Yermin 16 Apr

So your claim is: take away slave-grown cotton from the core textile industry, and nothing materially changes?

reply
7 sats \ 1 reply \ @denlillaapan OP 16 Apr

yes.

What's so hard/objectionable/unacceptable about this? Slavery, as abhorrent an institution it is from our modern pow -- having been present absolutely everywhere in human history -- was economically inefficient, upheld by communal subsidies, and played an altogether minor (read: none) role in bring about the rich, modern world

reply
7 sats \ 0 replies \ @Yermin 16 Apr

And it wasn’t just cotton, slaves produced tobacco, sugar, rice, indigo. If all of that disappears, what replaces those outputs in your model?

reply