Why did Britain Industrialize before the rest of Europe?

Was it due to some peculiar or unique national advantage, or just luck?

Attached: industrial rev.jpg (271x186, 8K)

Other urls found in this thread:

tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/03585522.1958.10416429
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Someone has to be first

Plenty of coal, highly in touch with ideas from the rest of the world from naval traditions, relatively large educated middle class.

You don't accidentally design and manufacture the first purpose built functional economically productive steam engine using metallurgy barely out of the middle ages. The element of luck wasn't present in the final stages at least.

While Bongs certainly had more resources than Inuit and Bedouin, the same comparison cannot be made with France or other Europeans.

The only explanation is that they deliberately invested in science and technology and applied it to their commercial enterprises to a greater extent than their peers.

Is that last part a guess or do you have a source to back it up?

Scots

luck, theft and a class-based society that was as disdainful and exploitative of the masses at home as the wogs they enslaved elsewhere

Unparalleled british ingenuity

Britain's legal system allowed for normal citizens to become entrepreneurs. Mix this with the Protestant work ethic, a thirst for knowledge, and the world's best sailors, and you get the Industrial Revolution

The Anglo master race

Lots of coal, lots of rivers and streams, big markets, some luck, etc.

Not him, but you can't have an industrial revolution without an agricultural revolution. Since the UK was ahead of europe in that area, they had many businessmen who had excess crops to sell on the open market, generating large amount of capital which could then be re-invested into agriculture and importantly other sectors of the economy such as industry.

They didn't.
Britain was an irrelevant shithole and always will be. All of Europe industrialized before them

>While Bongs certainly had more resources than Inuit and Bedouin, the same comparison cannot be made with France or other Europeans.
There's a reason why it industrialized first, and why Germany and America so quickly left it in the dust.

Attached: epopula1.jpg (432x360, 77K)

Because anglos have a long tradition of freedom since the Magna carta. Thus any and all bongs were able to mess around and the more shit thrown the more that sticks. Liberalism.

Basically this. Germany was outperforming the bongs in all industrial metrics shortly after it formed, which was the largest reason they surpassed Bongistan's GDP in the early 20th century.

Industrial revolution is not where industrialisation begins (and even then Britain is not first nor last). There were indutries all over Europe centuries before.

>Germany and America so quickly left it in the dust.
100 years is not 'so quickly'

That was the moment WW1 became inevitable

>he took the bait

Attached: 1520711145966.jpg (534x534, 33K)

Yet the Germans who had none of that were also able to industrialize quickly.

HAHAHAHA

Attached: Industrialization_per_capita_1750-1900.svg.png (800x579, 77K)

Yes, the bongs were well into their decline by then, resorting to concentration camps to hold scattered patches of dirt, frantically making treaty agreements all over the world to paper over their weakness, marshalling all resources and treaty signatories for the war they hungered for... it really was a mess.

>the only one who can beat the Anglo is the Anglo
What a success story.

Americans and Germans are terrifying

Attached: 1521302669275.jpg (680x671, 68K)

>makes my point

>surpassed Bongistan's GDP
They were still far behind in per capita.

>Britain hungering for WW1
Fuck off with this delusional bullshit. Who mobilized before Britain? Who declared war on France and Russia? Who invaded Belgium and then insulted the British when they protested? Do you really ignore historical facts like these? Why are you even on a history board then?

Plus Britain had an empire which had a much higher GDP than Germany

>only US surpasses Britain
>makes my point
What

>it took 14 billion years for Britian to industrialize
>in only 100 years Germany and America surpassed them

I would say that is pretty quick

After the Triple Entente do you really expect Germany to allow itself to be encircled? A proactive war was their only hope. If they could knock France out of the war first, then they could deal with Russia afterwards since they're so slow at mobilizing.

Attached: 287893278937893.jpg (190x270, 7K)

You forgot the fact that there were infinite universes before this one so it actually took Britain infinity years to industrialise

>do it first
>with a smaller population and less territory
>it takes longer
Whoah...

The Triple Entente was not designed to push Germany into war, though, and certainly that was not Britain's goal.

>t. buttdevastated bong, still carrying the torch of muh empire, well over a century after it was in full decline and seeking war to put down the competition (which didn't work as we see today)

>says absolutely nothing about the empire
Wasted quads, that's for sure. I literally only talked about basic facts that Germany unequivocally did.
>seeking war to put down the competition
That would be Germany, actually. They were shitscared about Russia's potential (as we would see a couple decades later when they pushed their shit in.)

Shame to see quads wasted like this

Attached: 1519944761681.jpg (192x268, 13K)

>The Triple Entente was not designed to push Germany into war, though, and certainly that was not Britain's goal.
kek, this is just delusional, on multiple counts

>t. bong, still buttblasted

It was an informal alignment against the obvious opposition formed by the central powers after Germany started making moves in the Moroccan crisis and Austria-Hungary against Serbia (under Russia's aegis as an ally and their position as the orthodox faith) and furthermore having totally alienated the French with the Franco-Prussian war. Nothing the Entente ever did 00forced either of those two powers to make their moves.

Yes they had Lv5 ingenuity because their global empire let them afford Europa Universalis IV: Rule Brittania
But seriously it was Cornish water pumps being used for something other than cave emptying

>t. the bong delusion isn't softening, anons

But why do they have to declare war, why can’t Willy just help Nicky be absolutist?

>still posting
Didn't your mother ever tell you that if you have nothing to say, don't say anything at all?

>mother
You mean mom, fucking bongs and their formalities

>mom
>not mum
Americaned.com

>lol it's just a guess
Many books by academic writers like The Unbound Prometheus present similar views. I can't be bothered to meticulously list every single thing I have read in response to a 1 sentence reply. You can look up the facts on the internet yourself and use your logic and reasoning skills to connect them to my completely reasonable conclusion. Here are some starting points anyway.

Leibniz, rival to Newton, had to dart back and forth around Europe looking for a patron while Newton enjoyed the privileges afforded by the Royal Society. An institution supported by the crown dedicated to "improving natural knowledge", not a university and not just astronomy or drawings of plants and animals. You would have to stretch pretty far to find a similar institution elsewhere in the same time period.

Even when similar institutions arose, Britain took to science and technology more readily, for example while the LeBlanc process was pioneered in France, the industry grew in Britain instead.

Then there are the plethora of innovators who originated in Britain themselves, Hooke, Darby, Arkwright, Packard, Jenner, Newcomen...

Britain had few tariffs and tolls and legal protection for businesses that were scarce elsewhere.

The new bourgeois-aristocracy celebrated the bill of rights and their liberty as in pic related.

Britain was a hive of activity at the beginning of the industrial revolution and the results speak for themselves, by the Napoleonic era their GDP per capita was double that of France while the French were guillotining Lavoisier. Read more about the history of the iron and textile industry, early capitalism and early industrial revolution. To be fair the Dutch contributed much in the 17th century however it mostly shifted to Britain after the glorious revolution due to repeated French invasions.

Attached: 2014HA4049_jpg_l[1].jpg (400x600, 51K)

France has enormous anthracite and bituminous coal deposits like Britain.

At the beginning of the 18th century Britain imported much iron and at the beginning of the 18th century most of its coal was charcoal produced from timber, which again mostly had to be imported. Also this does not explain the textile industry which uses little iron and the majority were water powered until the 19th century. Coal, while a bonus, does not fully explain the industrial revolution.

tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/03585522.1958.10416429 page 5

Attached: World-Map-of-Coal-Deposits[1].png (970x578, 106K)

neat

Attached: neat.jpg (674x270, 14K)

Faggot

Most of it was very poor and agricultural.

Another uneducated trollop dropping in with an agenda. At least stay on topic buddy

It's a discussion board user, at least try to say something worthwhile even if you are impossibly deluded

>It's a discussion board user, at least try to say something worthwhile even if you are impossibly deluded

*i cant think of anything to contribute to the thread*
wait, ive got it:

BRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPP!

Innovative>imitate
Japs were even quicker