I don't exactly know how you drew your conclusion from the text, but the justification that you've identified with the aid of that movie dialogue makes sense to me. Although I don't read the justification itself from the book review, the example you're giving seems to indicate to the inherent bias that I would expect from a book that covers European expansion.
So are you interpreting that the book is framing European expansion post-plague as Europe "saving" territories that didn't experience the advantages that they did?
If so, good catch and a cautionary tale.