(The "Great Divergence" is the trend to hegemony dominance by Western Europe and it's overseas diaspora over the past 5 or so centuries)
Of course much of the foundation had already been laid by 1700, but therein lies the challenge. With a preference for PODs that raise others up rather then tearing the West down(or at least tear them down creatively rather then with pandemics/WMDs).
Of course global equality is an impossibility, but the incline could surely have been less steep then it was.
For example, if the BEIC was defeated at the battle of Plassey: supposedly the Nawab's army was defeated for want of a tarpaulin sheet- as a result their gunpowder was ruined by rainfall, and the BEIC proceeded to defeat them and conquer Bengal. In a stroke, one of the richest and most industrially sophisticated parts of India was conquered, the French were displaced(thus limiting their ability to thwart British advances elsewhere), while the BEIC were able to draw upon Bengal for financing and manpower easing their projection of force into South India.
If instead the Bengalese had retained their independence, and later the Mysoreans successfully resist incursions from the British(or French), this radically changes the worlds economic landscape. The industrial revolution in Britain should be at least partly inhibited without India as a tax base and captive market, while India itself remains a major exporter and enhances it's productive capacity with European technological exports.
Given the sheer size of India's population, even if it somewhat lags Western Europe in a per capita sense this could be sufficient for a bipolar balance of power in the late 19th century.
Of course much of the foundation had already been laid by 1700, but therein lies the challenge. With a preference for PODs that raise others up rather then tearing the West down(or at least tear them down creatively rather then with pandemics/WMDs).
Of course global equality is an impossibility, but the incline could surely have been less steep then it was.
For example, if the BEIC was defeated at the battle of Plassey: supposedly the Nawab's army was defeated for want of a tarpaulin sheet- as a result their gunpowder was ruined by rainfall, and the BEIC proceeded to defeat them and conquer Bengal. In a stroke, one of the richest and most industrially sophisticated parts of India was conquered, the French were displaced(thus limiting their ability to thwart British advances elsewhere), while the BEIC were able to draw upon Bengal for financing and manpower easing their projection of force into South India.
If instead the Bengalese had retained their independence, and later the Mysoreans successfully resist incursions from the British(or French), this radically changes the worlds economic landscape. The industrial revolution in Britain should be at least partly inhibited without India as a tax base and captive market, while India itself remains a major exporter and enhances it's productive capacity with European technological exports.
Given the sheer size of India's population, even if it somewhat lags Western Europe in a per capita sense this could be sufficient for a bipolar balance of power in the late 19th century.
Last edited: