You are completely ignoring philosophy. It was the ideas of freedom, of the possibility of liberty for all, of equality of men, that made the whole enterprise possible. China had the tools, sure. But not the incentives. Their emperor could not let lose a zoo of creativity, for fear of destruction of the empire.
This kind of smacks of euro-centrism. Especially considering how the West at that time had colonies that practiced chattel slavery, producing vast wealth for the owners of the colonies.
Short answer, sea power drove technological innovation (reliable clocks etc) and a global empire gave Britain access to more raw material for textiles than it could process by ahd, so there was a huge incentive for automation. Also, plenty of domestic iron ore and coal deposits allowed rapid scaling and positive feedback loops. Much of the IR centered on the north of England because they had good ports and the coal and iron ore was right there and did not need to be transported very far. Northern England developed in significantly different economic and cultural directions from the more mercantilist southern part of the country, which differences persist to this day.
I have no disagreement with the points you make, but they seem to tell a different story than one in which ideas of freedom, of the possibility of liberty for all, of equality of men were necessary. Watt's great invention came on the eve of Britain's attempt to suppress these dangerous ideas in its American colonies.
To be fair, I think freedom and individuality are part of the story, but that story is more sociological than philosophical. In part, I wonder if it is a consequence of the reformation and counter-reformation, which arrived at an accommodation in which the populace was allowed some freedom in how it conducted itself, so long as it did not challenge the authority of the state.
It is really only a debate about when exactly trees stop growing and consuming CO2. Given enough time, sooner or later the tree isn’t consuming CO2. At that point there is no point in leaving the tree standing. Cut it down and let a new tree grow there.
I cannot trust an article (podcast) where people say the following:
> Historian Judith Bennett notes that medieval women made about 1d./day while men made 1 ½ or 2d./day when doing similar work, like brewing, as men. 700 years later, women still make just 80 cents on the dollar for doing the same work as men.
The statement "80 cts on the dollar for the same work" is a falsehood. Simple as that. If people cannot get these simple facts right, I will not trust the rest they are saying.
In the realm of music, I think the mainstream has stayed roughly the same size but the rest of music has exploded in size and variety via Spotify/Bandcamp/Soundcloud/YouTube.
Instead of zines there's a million or so blogs and forums and newsletters.
Podcasts are an entirely new realm and only a tiny sliver of it cracks the mainstream.
The number of outlets for "TV shows" has exploded, so there's plenty that comes and goes without any significant mainstream exposure.
Much of the above is created on an enthusiasts budget for a tiny audience.
And I'd argue a lot of the above are exempt from "cancel culture" if only because most people don't know they exist.
While that's true, I tend to imagine it like a horde of mosquitoes, a bit like Paul Graham's idea[1], but applicable to social trends. I wrote a whole essay on trend movement that leads me to believe the pendulum is close to swinging.[2]
That has always been the case, and it used to be far worse when the entire media landscape was controlled by a couple dozen conglomerates. Being underground/subversive means you don't make a lot of money. If you want to make money do what everyone else does... sell out.
But hasn't it always been like that? Radical social/political views and any fringe stuff around sex and drugs has never had mainstream support or backing from big companies, basically by definition. And a lot of times it is straight up illegal. It has only ever survived by staying under the radar. And when it pops above the radar we get purity movements like the War on Drugs and the Parents Music Resource Center.
I think a lot of conservatives are mad about "cancel culture" because now they're being targeted by purity movements instead of the punks and freaks and hippies and queers. I say tough shit. Overall, the realm of acceptable discourse has expanded considerably and is arguably larger today than ever before. If they think their particular viewpoints are being unfairly suppressed, then do what everyone else did and go underground and do the work of bringing your views to the mainstream.
The first draft of an actual underground which can't just be shutdown by attacking a server is https://getaether.net/ having build up on the lessons of freenet and bittorrent.
It isn't the be all and end all, but it's a huge step forward.
