Why Did the West Dominate?

Why it was it that the European powers conquered and dominated the world rather than the Asian powers of Eurasia who, historically, have been one of the most powerful and stable places in the world, and had a technological head-start for centuries. Europe was a broken and utterly powerless place during the 15th century, but by 1914 they were in control of 84% of the Earth. There are many answers, proposed by a variety of sources, like Jared Diamond, Niall Ferguson, or Philip Hoffman, including examples such as immunity to diseases like smallpox which devastated the Americas, or a difference in the way both cultures viewed the natural world around them. And while these responses are valid, I think there is an underlying cause that allowed the series of events to take place in the manner it did, something unique to Western Europe. The “patchwork quilt” of autonomous states that vied for power and wealth, bred innovation. Competition between these societies was massive and ensured that those who didn’t develop quickly would soon be conquered. In other words it was a natural selection of societies – only the most economically and militarily advanced societies survived. Unlike in Europe, Asia had large isolated empires which deprived them of as much competition and led to policies that sometimes hindered their economic development. One example is when China banned ocean-going ships in the 16th century, just as the Europeans were beginning to explore and colonise the world.

The development of gunpowder technology was critical in the domination of the Europeans, because it provided the power, the weaponry and military technology, necessary to triumph over any enemy. But, the other rising civilisations in Asia also developed these same technologies, even before the Europeans did, and fought in many wars using said technology, just as the Europeans did, so what explains the lead that the Europeans developed? The very incentives that political leaders in Europe faced, bred war, and the innovation of war technology and strategy if they wanted to end up on top in their game of thrones. Political incentives that drove them not just to fight wars, but to spend massive amounts on it. The Palace of Versailles, a masterclass of architecture, only costed Louis XIV 2% of the tax revenue, while the rest was spent fighting wars. The political fragmentation and instability made it so competition was the lifeblood of these societies, while their Eastern counterparts faced radically different incentives and conditions. China was often the dominant power in Eastern Asia, and their enemies wouldn’t dare challenge it, therefore not pushing China to spend heavily on war and war technology, which is why they didn’t push gunpowder technology development as far as the Europeans. Following the collapse of the Western Roman Empire, Europe experienced a sort of anarchy that could be seen in countries like Somalia or Afghanistan today. An anarchy that lasted for centuries, keeping a dominant power from emerging, like one did in China. This anarchy also ensured that Europe was divided into hostile powers that fought constantly that needed to spend fortunes on war.

Yet, competition was present within Asia, but in a different form that in the West. A form of competition that enforced uniformity and conformity, rather than innovation and change. As seen via their Imperial Examination, the Ming Chinese dictated that one must conform to the rest of society if they were to succeed. Their Western