Hacker News Reader

Comment by Arn_Thor | Hacker News Reader

So what? My point is that the two processes were interlinked and fed off each other. The industrial revolution was helped by empire. But the fact that it took place in the UK helped it expand and deepen that very empire faster than the competition. The Maxim Gun, at the bleeding edge of technology in 1884, was made in London and helped Britain subjugate African countries and nudge out other imperial powers.

View on HN

Let's not forget FinTech and Lawfare evolving in parallel here either.

Stock Exchanges evolved from Dutch and London Coffee Houses and the Maxim Gun is also famous in cementing the "No Compete" clause into law ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordenfelt_v_Maxim_Nordenfelt_...

> the Maxim Gun is also famous in cementing the "No Compete" clause into law

Nordenfelt cemented severavility; non-competes were already commonplace. (In that case, the blue pencil was used to restrict the scope of the non-compete. But that’s not why it’s important.)

I'll pay that, it sounds as if you're across the history and evolution of Lawfare which was a main thrust of my comment - a number of strands developed alongside colonialism and industrialisation.

You seem to be more knowledgeable, do you think the Maxim Gun kept the empire or expanded it? If so, into which countries do you think the Maxim Gun helped to expand?

The Maxim saw its heyday in "Africa' (region) which was being carved up by European powers who were marking out countries for European maps and stomping across the borders of pre existing kingdoms.

The "Scramble for Africa" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scramble_for_Africa

hit peak pitch following 1870 or so and saw 90% of Africa "claimed" by 1914, the Great War and the rise of the Vickers Machine Gun (which evolved from the Maxim).

Also Samoa.

Makes me wonder just how relatively valuable copra and cocoa bean were to the US and Europe if outside resource lust underpinned an eight year civil war way out in the Pacific.

    The Germans, in particular, began to show great commercial interest in the Samoan Islands, especially on the island of Upolu, where German firms monopolised copra and cocoa bean processing.

~ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samoa

leading to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samoan_Civil_War

> wonder just how relatively valuable copra and cocoa bean were

Profit is revenue minus cost. Cost of colonisation is vastly reduced if the target nation is infighting. Cocoa was absolutely valuable, but Samoa’s attractiveness may have also been in its inability to defend itself. (Particularly against European weapons.)

Particularly against European machinations.

There's a robust pattern of increased infighting wherever the European colonists went .. almost as if they delibrately sowed discontent and sold weapons at discount to all sides.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com