Your culture sucks, mine is better

[Az]

Spanish imperialism was primarily about plundering precious natural resources, particularly gold and silver. Victorian (capitalist) imperialism was fundamentally different, plundering markets and destroying competition. Which is definitely a more recent phenomenon.

right, but it was the same european emperialism. Which continued all the time. Think about the mercantilist emperialism between those two eras.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Azazel
There is a very much strong connection between Spain's new world conquests, and Victorian world-wide expansion. It was the same emperialism of old, AS ALWAYS backed by economical incentives, but capitalism wasn't special at that, either.

The only connection between the two is that the previous version of imperialism provided the money to start capitalism. Spanish, French, Portugese, etc., imperialism was about plunder. Capitalist imperialism was about opening new markets for capital to invest in.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Azazel

right, but it was the same european emperialism. Which continued all the time. Think about the mercantilist emperialism between those two eras.

The you're looking at forms and dismissing essences. You might as well say European feudalism and European capitalism were identical because they were both European.

[Ramo]

right, but it was the same european emperialism. Which continued all the time. Think about the mercantilist emperialism between those two eras.

Well, I'd classify both styles of imperialistic policies (Spanish/Portuguese/French and English/Dutch) mercantilistic in their own ways. I'm not sure what you mean.

[Az]

Emperialism is primarily a geo-political phenomenon. It was it that caused the main damage and devastation throughout the world, the economical systems were just various ways in which the european states exploited their empires. The synthetical separation would imply that there was breaks or something between them. OF COURSE THE NATURE OF EMPERIALISM CHANGED. noone claims otherwise. But European Emperialism as a phenomenon predates the Enlightenment.

[Q Classic]

Bah. It's supposed to look like Korean

eh? howso? the circles are a letter, yes... but they're in the wrong place, since you can't have two at the bottom like that. and then you have two other letters, like the e on it's side... but it's oriented wrong. or the c that's also on its side. but that's also oriented wrong....

it looks nothing like korean, tass...

[Az]

Originally posted by Ramo


Well, I'd classify both styles of imperialistic policies (Spanish/Portuguese/French and English/Dutch) mercantilistic in their own ways. I'm not sure what you mean.

emperialistic policies changed of all powers changed as economic systems and theories evolved. Your point is kinda void in that. What I meant is that calling only the Victorian era emperialism 'emperialism' is incorrect, and therefore, emperialism predated the enlightment and it's ideas.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Azazel


Emperialism . . .

How can I take your opinion seriously if you refuse to even spell the word correctly?

[Dinner]

Typos happen.

[Kidlicious]

It should be spelled that way though. Empire-Emperialism.

[Q Classic]

but typos are rarely persistent.

[Ramo]

emperialistic policies changed of all powers changed as economic systems and theories evolved. Your point is kinda void in that. What I meant is that calling only the Victorian era emperialism 'emperialism' is incorrect, and therefore, emperialism predated the enlightment and it's ideas.

I don't call only Victorian era imperialism "imperialism." I only said that capitalist imperialism should be considered distinct from non-capitalist forms of imperialism, as they were fundamentlly different beasts.

[Az]

Oh, crucify me for not knowing how it's spelled.

[chequita guevara]

All you had to do was look at how everyone else spelled it.

[Az]

I don't call only Victorian era imperialism "imperialism." I only said that capitalist imperialism should be considered distinct from non-capitalist forms of imperialism, as they were fundamentlly different beasts.

Yes, the processes by which they operate are different, but in the case of European domination of the world, the one naturally flowed into the other. Therefore, European Imperialism wasn't a child of the Enlightenment.